Iceland’s external affairs in the Middle Ages: The shelter of Norwegian sea power
Iceland’s Fourth National Communication on Climate...
75
Iceland’s Fourth National Communication on Climate Change Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and Iceland’s Report on Demonstrable Progress Under the Kyoto Protocol
Transcript of Iceland’s Fourth National Communication on Climate...
Iceland’s Fourth National
Communication on Climate ChangeUnder the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change
and
Iceland’s Report on
Demonstrable ProgressUnder the Kyoto Protocol
Iceland’s Fourth National
Communication on Climate ChangeUnder the United NationsFramework Convention on Climate Change
and
Iceland’s Report on
Demonstrable ProgressUnder the Kyoto Protocol
Published by the Ministry for the Environment in Iceland.
For additional copies of this document please contact the Ministry for the Environment:
Phone: +354 545 8600 or http://www.umhverfisraduneyti.is
Cover photographs: Ragnar Th. www.ljosmyndasafn.is
Design: Í pokahorninu/Ragnheiður Kristjánsdóttir www.islandia.is/pokahorn
Printing: GuðjónÓ
March 2006
ISBN: 9979-839-25-2
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
ICELAND´S FOURTH NATIONAL COMMUNICATION ON CLIMATE CHANGE . . . . . . 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
CHAPTER 1 NATIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111.1 Government structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111.2 Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111.3 Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121.4 Climate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121.5 The economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131.6 Fisheries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141.7 The energy sector. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141.8 Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151.9 Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.10 Agriculture, land management and forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151.11 Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161.12 Other circumstances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
CHAPTER 2 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182.1 Key developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182.2 National system for preparing the greenhouse gas inventory in Iceland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.1 Institutional arrangement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182.2.2 Process of inventory preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182.2.3 Planned and implemented improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3 Greenhouse gas emissions inventory and trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192.3.1 Emissions trends for aggregated greenhouse gas emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192.3.2 Emissions trends by gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202.3.3 Emissions trends by source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
CHAPTER 3 POLICIES AND MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273.1 Iceland’s commitments and climate change strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273.2 Policy development process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273.3 Key measures in emissions reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.3.1 The energy sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273.3.2 The transportation sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283.3.3 The fisheries sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293.3.4 Industrial processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293.3.5 The waste sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303.3.6 The agriculture sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.4 Carbon sequestration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303.5 Research and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313.6 Information and public awareness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313.7 Other measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
CHAPTER 4 PROJECTIONS AND THE TOTAL EFFECT OF MEASURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324.2 Scenarios and key assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324.3 Projections and aggregate effects of policies and measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324.4 Methodology and sensitivity analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 5 IMPACTS AND ADAPTATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355.1 Impacts on climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355.2 Impacts on oceanic currents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355.3 Impacts on marine ecosystems and fish stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365.4 Impacts on glaciers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365.5 Impacts on forests, land management and agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375.6 Impacts on terrestrial ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375.7 Impacts on society. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385.8 Adaptation measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
CHAPTER 6 FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406.1 Official Development Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406.2 The four pillars of Icelandic development co-operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406.3 Implementation of Iceland’s development co-operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
CHAPTER 7 RESEARCH AND SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447.1 General research policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447.2 Climatic research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
7.2.1 Climate process and climate system studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447.2.2 Modeling and prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457.2.3 Impacts of climate change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457.2.4 Socio-economic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467.2.5 Carbon cycle and carbon sequestration studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
7.3 Systematic observation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477.3.1 Atmospheric climate observing systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477.3.2 Ocean climate observing systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
7.4 Research on mitigation options and technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487.4.1 International hydrogen projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
CHAPTER 8 EDUCATION, TRAINING AND PUBLIC AWARENESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508.1 General education policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508.2 Environmental education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508.3 Public access to resources and information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 518.4 Involvement of non-governmental organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
ICELAND´S REPORT ON DEMONSTRABLE PROGRESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
CHAPTER 1 ICELAND´S CLIMATE POLICY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
CHAPTER 2 TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. . . . . . . . 57
CHAPTER 3 EFFECTS OF POLICIES TOWARDS REACHING KYOTO TARGETS. . . . . . . . . . 593.1 Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593.2 Industrial processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 603.3 Fishing industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 603.4 Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613.5 Carbon sequestration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613.6 Other measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
CHAPTER 4 MEASURES TO MEET OTHER COMMITMENTS UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.1 Greenhouse gas inventory and national system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624.2 Adaptation measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624.3 Cooperation in research and technology transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
ANNEX A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
ANNEX B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
ANNEX C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
7
Iceland’s Fourth National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
describes the trends in greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland, policies and measures to curb emissions and their
effect, and other relevant information in line with the guidelines of the Convention. This report also, for practical
reasons, includes Iceland’s Report on Demonstrable Progress, which is intended to show how Iceland has aimed
to fulfill its commitment under Article 3 of the Kyoto Protocol.
Total greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland increased by 8% in the period 1990 to 2003. Emissions per capita,
however, decreased by 5% in the same period, and emissions per GDP decreased by 20%.
Total emissions are expected to increase significantly in the next few years. The main reason for this is the oper-
ationalization of a new aluminum smelter in 2007, and other possible new energy-intensive projects. Such proj-
ects have a big impact on total emission levels in Iceland, despite the fact that they use only renewable energy, and
are required to use best available technology to minimize emissions from industrial processes, because of the
small size of the Icelandic economy. In line with decision 14/CP.7, Iceland will report emissions of carbon dioxide
from such new projects since 1990 separately. By applying this decision, it is projected that Iceland will meet its
commitments under the Kyoto Protocol despite the predicted increase in overall emissions. The aluminum and
ferrosilicon industries are export industries, and Iceland has argued that expansion of such energy-intensive
industry in the country is beneficial from the perspective of climate change mitigation, because their use of renew-
able energy and best available technology ensures that emissions are as low as possible from a global perspective.
Iceland believes that it has achieved demonstrable progress towards fulfilling its commitment under Article 3 of
the Kyoto Protocol. Progress has been especially noticeable to date in the decrease of emissions of fluorocarbons
from the aluminum industry, and in increased sequestration of carbon from the atmosphere due to increased
government funding to afforestation and revegetation. Carbon sequestration is a key factor in Icelandic climate
policy, because it complements the high political emphasis on revegetation and afforestation of eroded lands.
Results to date have been less obvious in the transport and fisheries sectors, which together produce almost half of
emissions. Important policy steps have, however, been taken in these sectors, that should have a growing impact
in curbing emissions. Tariffs on non-polluting and low-polluting vehicles have been lowered and the tax system
altered to make small diesel-powered cars more competitive than before. New energy-saving technology has been
introduced in government-owned ships, and significant gains in reducing emissions from ships are seen as a
possibility. In the longer term, hydrogen is seen as a potential energy carrier for cars and ships, and research and
demonstration projects in the field of hydrogen technology have been conducted, with the view to speed up the
process towards widespread use of hydrogen.
The single most striking feature with regard to Iceland and climate change mitigation is the fact that over 70%
of its energy – and practically speaking all stationary energy – comes from renewable resources, hydro and geo-
thermal. This means that Iceland has almost no chance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the production
of electricity and spatial heating, as Iceland had already almost abolished the use of fossil fuels for these purposes
in 1990. On the other hand, in perhaps no other field has Iceland a greater potential to contribute to global climate
change mitigation than by the export of know-how in the fields of renewable energy and climate-friendly technol-
ogy. Efforts in this respect have been ongoing for decades – exemplified by the running of the UN University´s
Geothermal Programme – and have been strengthened in recent years.
INTRODUCTION
Iceland’s Fourth NationalCommunication on Climate Change
Under the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change
10
National circumstancesIceland is a parliamentary democracy. Most executive power rests with the
Government, which is headed by a prime minister. The population of Iceland is
300,000, with almost two-thirds of the population living in the capital, Reykjavík, and
surrounding areas.
Iceland has an area of 103,000 km, and is the second largest island in Europe after
Great Britain. Glaciers cover more than 10% of the area. Soil erosion and desertification
is a problem, and more than half of the country’s vegetation cover is estimated to have
disappeared due to erosion since the settlement period. The country is situated just
south of the Arctic Circle but the mean temperature is considerably higher than might
be expected at this latitude. Relatively mild winters and cool summers characterize the
climate. Iceland is an industrialized country with a high living standard. The country
consistently ranks among the top 10 states in the UNDP Human Development Index.
Iceland is very dependent upon international trade, and the generation of foreign
revenue is highly dependent on natural resources. The fishing industry relies on the rich
fishing grounds in Icelandic waters, the aluminum and ferrosilicon industry on
hydropower and geothermal energy and the tourism industry on nature and natural
beauty. The use of energy is very high per capita, but the proportion of domestic renew-
able energy in the total energy budget is 70%, which is a much larger share than in most
other countries. The use of fossil fuels for stationary energy is almost nonexistent but
fossil fuels are used for transport on land, sea and in air. Three features stand out that
make the Icelandic greenhouse gas emissions profile unusual. First is the high propor-
tion of renewable energy of the total amount of energy used. Second, emissions from
the fishing fleet are about one-fourth of total emissions. The third distinctive feature is
the fact that individual sources of industrial process emissions have a significant
proportional impact on emissions at the national level, due to the small size of the
economy.
Greenhouse gas inventory informationThe Environment and Food Agency compiles and maintains the greenhouse gas inven-
tory. In 1990, the total emissions of the six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto
Protocol were 3,282 Gg of CO2 equivalents. In 2003, total emissions were 3,534 Gg,
excluding LUCF. If emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7 on the Impact of Single
Projects on Emissions in the Commitment Period are excluded, emissions were 3,083
Gg in 2003. This means that total greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland were about 8%
above 1990 level in 2003. In that period, carbon dioxide emissions increased by 4%;
methane emissions increased by 14%: and nitrous oxide emissions fell by 16%. Removals
of CO2 from direct human-induced revegetation and reforestation since 1990 are esti-
mated to be 207 Gg in 2003. Industry, transport and fisheries are the three main sources
of GHG emissions, but other sources include agriculture and waste.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
11
Policies and measuresIceland is a party of the UNFCCC, and Iceland ratified the Kyoto Protocol on May 23,
2002. Earlier that year, the government adopted a new climate change policy that was
formulated with close cooperation between several ministries. The aim of the policy is to
curb emissions of greenhouse gases so that they will not exceed the limits of Iceland’s
obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. A second objective is to increase the level of
carbon sequestration resulting from reforestation and revegetation programs. A review
of this policy was started in 2005, and is due to be concluded in 2006. Key issues in the
climate change policy include changes in taxation creating incentives to use small diesel
cars and consultation with aluminum smelters on how to minimize PFC emissions, in
addition to carbon sequestration. The fishing industry will be further encouraged to
increase energy efficiency, and emissions from waste disposals will be curbed.
Projections and the total effect of measuresA new projection for GHG emissions until 2020 is included in this report. Two scenar-
ios are provided in the projections, depending on the level of increase in new energy-
intensive industry in Iceland in that period. The first scenario assumes no additions to
energy-intensive industries other than those enlargements already in progress in
2004/2005. The second scenario is based on the assumption that all projects which
currently have an operational license will be built. If emissions are in accord with projec-
tions, Iceland will be able to meet its obligations for the first commitment period of the
Kyoto Protocol in both scenarios. Discussions are under way about the construction of
two additional new aluminum smelters in Iceland. If a decision to build them is made, it
will be necessary to consider additional measures to ensure that Iceland will meet its
Kyoto committments.
Impacts and adaptation measuresIt is uncertain what impact climate change will have in Iceland. Natural fluctuations in
temperature are greater in the North Atlantic than in most other oceanic areas, so the
impact of increasing temperatures due to the greenhouse effect will differ depending on
the direction of the short-term natural fluctuation. An increase in temperature could
have some positive effects on marine resources and fish stocks. However, more insects
could increase risks of disease in both plants and humans, which would be a negative
impact. A worst-case scenario for Iceland would be if climate change would lead to major
disruptions in ocean circulation that would inter alia have negative impact on fish stocks.
Financial assistance and technology transferThe Icelandic government has been increasing their Official Development Assistance
(ODA) in recent years, and in 2004 ODA had reached 0.19% of GDP. Sustainable devel-
opment is one of the central themes in Icelandic development cooperation. Especially
noteworthy in relation to climate change is the UN University’s Geothermal Training
Program in Iceland, which has been strengthened in recent years. In addition to ODA,
the Icelandic government also provides financial assistance to environmentally related
projects in other countries through their participation in various international agree-
ments. Iceland has also made voluntary contribution to the UNFCCC and to the IPCC.
Research and systematic observationFunds allocated to research and development were 1% of GDP in 1990 but had reached
around 3% of GDP in the year 2003, making Iceland fourth among OECD countries in
R&D spending per GDP. Icelandic scientists are involved in a number of climate-related
12
research projects. The Icelandic Meteorological Office (IMO) is involved in climate
system studies and does some work on modeling and prediction. Paleoclimatological
work has mainly taken place within the University of Iceland. Icelandic scientists and
research institutions are involved in several projects that study the impact of future
global climate changes, including the recently concluded Arctic Climate Impact
Assessment (ACIA) and the Climate, Water and Energy (CWE) program, which the
Hydrological Institutes of the Nordic countries are responsible for. Important research
projects deal with technical aspects of mitigation, including on renewable energy, hydro-
gen and other climate-friendly technology, and methods to increase carbon sequestra-
tion. The two institutions most important in relation to observation of climate change
are the IMO and the Marine Research Institute (MRI). Research affects policy making in
various ways, a recent example being results showing drained wetlands being a signifi-
cant and previously unrecognized emission source, which has led authorities to include
wetland reclamation as a climate policy emphasis in a draft sustainable development
strategy review.
Education, training and public awarenessEnvironmental education in schools has increased in the past decade. The University of
Iceland now offers a Master’s degree in environmental studies, where climate change is an
integral subject. Many upper secondary schools offer courses in the same, or place special
emphasis on environmental issues in their curriculum. Studies of environmental issues in
primary schools are included in many subjects, especially natural sciences. As renewable
energy is used for both space heating and electrical production, public information
campaigns aimed at energy efficiency are less relevant for the purpose of reducing GHG emis-
sions in Iceland than in many other countries, although efforts to reduce emissions from
transport by this means could be strengthened.
13
CHAPTER
1.1Government structureIceland has a written constitution and is a parliamentary
democracy. A president is elected by direct popular vote
for a term of four years, with no term limit. Most execu-
tive power, however, rests with the Government, which
must have majority support of Althingi, the Parliament.
Althingi has 63 members, and parliamentary elections
are held every four years. The government is headed by a
prime minister, and the executive branch is currently
divided among 12 ministers. Judicial power lies with the
Supreme Court and the district courts, and the judiciary
is independent.
The country is divided into 101 municipalities, and
local authorities are elected every four years. The largest
municipality is the capital, Reykjavík, with 113,730 inhab-
itants, but the greater capital area has over 180 thousand
inhabitants in 8 municipalities. The smallest municipality
has only 38 inhabitants. In 1990 the number of munici-
palities was 204, but in the last decade an attempt has been
made to unite small municipalities, and this has resulted
in fewer, but more populous, municipalities. This trend is
likely to continue since the tasks of local authorities have
grown increasingly complex in recent years. The local
authorities have their own sources of revenue and budgets
and are responsible for various areas that are important
with regard to greenhouse gas emissions. This includes
physical planning, granting industry licenses and the
design and operation of public transport. Municipalities
also play an important role in education.
The Ministry for the Environment is responsible for
the implementation of the UNFCCC and coordinated
national climate change policymaking in close coopera-
tion with the Ministries of Agriculture, Industry and
Commerce, Transport and Communications, Fisheries,
Finance, Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister’s
Office. Several public institutions and public enterprises,
operating under the auspices of these ministries, also
participated directly or indirectly in preparing the
national implementation policy.
1.2 PopulationThe population of Iceland is 300,000. The population is
projected to grow by about 12% over the next two
decades, reaching around 325,000 in 2020. Settlement is
primarily along the coast. More than 60% of the nation
lives in the capital, Reykjavik, and surrounding areas. In
1990 this same ratio was
57%, demonstrat ing
higher population growth
in the capital area than in
smaller communities and
rural areas.
Iceland is the most
sparsely populated
country in Europe. The
population density is less
than three inhabitants per
square kilometer. Given
the large percentage of
the population living in
and around the capital,
the rest of the country is
1 NATIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
15 10 5 0 5 10 15%
Population by sex and age 1960 and 2004
1960 2004
90
85–89
80–84
75–79
70–74
65–69
60–64
55–69
50–54
45–49
40–44
35–39
30–34
25–29
20–24
15–19
10–14
5– 9
0– 4
even more sparsely populated, with less than one inhabi-
tant per square km. Almost four-fifths of the country are
uninhabited and mostly uninhabitable, the population
therefore being concentrated in a narrow coastal belt,
valleys and the southwest corner of the country. The
dispersed settlement of the country results in relatively
high emissions of greenhouse gases due to transport.
Emissions from space heating are, however, much lower
than what might be expected, keeping in mind the cool
climate. This is because the majority of the population
relies on non-emitting renewable energy sources for
district heating, as will be explained in more detail in the
energy chapter.
1.3 GeographyIceland is located in the North Atlantic between Norway,
Scotland and Greenland. It is the second-largest island in
Europe and the third largest in the Atlantic Ocean, with a
land area of some 103 thousand square kilometers, a
coastline of 4,970 kilometers and a 200-nautical-mile
exclusive economic zone extending over 758 thousand
square kilometers in the surrounding waters. Iceland
enjoys a warmer climate than its northerly location
would indicate because a part of the Gulf Stream flows
around the southern and western coasts of the country.
In Reykjavík the average temperature is nearly 11°C in
July and just below zero in January.
Geologically speaking, the country is very young and
bears many signs of still being in the making. Iceland is
mostly mountainous and of volcanic origin. Glaciers are
a distinctive feature of Iceland, covering about 11% of the
total land area. The largest glacier, also the largest in
Europe, is Vatnajökull in Southeast Iceland with an area
of 8,300 km2. Glacial erosion has played an important
part in giving the valleys their present shape, and in some
areas, the landscape possesses alpine characteristics.
Regular monitoring has shown that all glaciers in Iceland
are presently receding.
Rivers and lakes are numerous in Iceland, covering
about 6% of the total land area. Freshwater supplies are
abundant, but the rivers flowing from the highlands to
the sea also provide major potential for hydropower
development. Geothermal energy is another domestic
source of energy.
Soil erosion and desertification is a problem in
Iceland. More than half of the country’s vegetation cover
is estimated to have disappeared because of erosion since
the settlement period. This is particularly due to clearing
of woodlands and overgrazing, which have accelerated
erosion of the sensitive volcanic soil. Remnants of the
former woodlands now cover less than 1,200 km2, or only
about 1% of the total surface area. Arable and permanent
cropland amounts to approximately 1,300 km2 .
Systematic revegetation began more than a century ago
with the establishment of the
Soil Conservation Service of
Iceland, which is a governmen-
tal agency. Reforestation proj-
ects have also been numerous
in the last decades, and espe-
cially noteworthy is the active
participation of the public in
both soil conservation projects
and reforestation projects.
Iceland has access to rich
marine resources in the country’s 758,000-km2 exclusive
economic zone. The abundance of marine plants and
animals results from the influence of the Gulf Stream and
the mixing of the warmer waters of the Atlantic with cold
Arctic waters. Approximately 270 fish species have been
found within the Icelandic 200-mile exclusive economic
zone; about 150 of these are known to spawn in the area.
1.4 ClimateIceland is situated just south of the Arctic Circle. The
mean temperature is considerably higher than might be
expected at this latitude. Relatively mild winters and cool
summers characterize Iceland’s oceanic climate. The
14
ICELAND
average monthly temperature varies from -3 to +3 °C in
January and from +8 to +15 °C in July. Storms and rain
are frequent, with annual precipitation ranging from 400
to 4000 mm on average annually, depending on location.
The mild climate stems from the Gulf Stream and atten-
dant warm ocean currents from the Gulf of Mexico. The
weather is also affected by polar currents from East
Greenland that travel southeast towards the coastline of
the northern and eastern part of Iceland.
The amount of daylight varies greatly between the
seasons. For two to three months in the summer there is
almost continuous daylight; early spring and late autumn
enjoy long twilight, but from November until the end of
January, the daylight is limited to only three or four
hours.
1.5 The economyIceland is endowed with abundant natural resources.
These include the fishing grounds around the island,
within and outside the country’s 200-mile EEZ.
Furthermore, Iceland has abundant hydroelectric and
geothermal energy resources
Policies of market liberalisation, fiscal consolidation,
privatisation and other structural reforms were imple-
mented in the late 1980s and 1990s, including member-
ship of the European Economic Area by which Iceland
was integrated into the internal market of the European
Union. Economic growth started to gain momentum by
the middle of the 1990s, rekindled by replenishing fish
stocks, a global economic recovery, a rise in exports and a
new wave of investment in the aluminum sector. During
the second half of the 1990s, the liberalisation process
continued, competition increased, the Icelandic financial
markets and financial institutions were restructured and
the exchange rate policy became more flexible. Iceland
experienced one of the highest growth rates of GDP
among OECD countries.
The large-scale investment projects in the aluminum
and power sectors which commenced in 2003 are now
well under way. When these projects are completed in
late 2008, the total production capacity of aluminum
smelters in Iceland will be 765,000 tons per year, up from
270,000 in 2005 and 90 thousand in 1995. Power capacity
needs to be stepped up by 130% to accommodate the
increase. Relative to the size of the Icelandic economy
these investment projects are very large.
The Icelandic economy is the smallest within the
OECD, reflecting the small population size, generating
GDP of €10.2 billion in 2004. GNI per capita measured in
terms of Purchasing Power Parities amounted to 32.4
thousand USD in 2004, the ninth highest in the world
and the sixth highest among the OECD countries.
15
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Des.
°C
Mean temperature in Reykjavík 1961–1990 and 2004
Reykjavík 1961–1990 Reykjavík 2004
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Thous. USD
Gross national income per capita in OECD countries 2004
LuxembourgUnited States
NorwaySwitzerland
IrelandIcelandAustria
DenmarkUnited Kingdom
BelgiumNetherlands
CanadaJapan
SwedenFinlandFrance
AustraliaGermany
ItalySpain
New ZealandGreeceKorea
PortugalCzech Republic
HungarySlovak Republic
PolandMexicoTurkey
Other services26.1%
Government services21.2%
Fishing and fish processing8.1%
Agriculture1.5%
Manifacturing industries9.3%
Electricity and water supply3.5%
Construction9.1%
Commerce13.2%
Transport and communication8.2%
Breakdown of GDP by sector 2004
1.6 FisheriesIceland is the 12. largest fishing nation in the world,
exporting nearly all its catch. The marine sector is still
one of the main economic sectors and the backbone of
export activities in Iceland although its importance has
diminished over the past four decades. In 2004, fishing
and fish processing contributed 60% of total merchan-
dise exports, compared with around 90% in the early
1960s. A comprehensive fisheries management system
based on individual transferable quotas has been devel-
oped to manage fish stocks and promote conservation
and efficient utilisation of the marine resources. All
commercially important species are regulated within the
system. In addition to the fisheries management system
there are a number of other explicit and direct measures
to support its aims and reinforce the conservation meas-
ures.
1.7 The energy sectorIceland has extensive domestic energy sources in the
form of hydro and geothermal energy. The development
of the energy sources in Iceland may be divided into three
phases. The first phase covered the electrification of the
country and harnessing the most accessible geothermal
fields, especially for spatial heating. In the second phase,
steps were taken to harness the resources for power-
intensive industry. This began in 1966 with the signing of
agreements on the building of an aluminum plant, and in
1979 a ferro-silicon plant began production. In the third
phase, following the oil crisis of 1973–74, efforts were
made to use domestic sources of energy to replace oil,
particularly for spatial heating. Oil has almost disap-
peared as a source of energy for spatial heating in Iceland,
and domestic energy has replaced oil in industry and in
other fields where such replacement is feasible and
economically viable.
Iceland ranks first among OECD countries in the per
capita consumption of primary energy with 8.6 tons per
capita, followed by the US with 8.1 tons per capita.
Electricity consumption per capita in Iceland is one of
the highest in the world at some 29,400 kWh per capita in
2004. A cool climate and sparse population calls for high
energy use for heating and transport. Also, key export
industries, such as fisheries and aluminum production,
are energy-intensive. The increase in the use of electricity
in the last decade is largely due to an expansion of energy-
intensive industry. Large-scale industry uses around 65%
of the total electricity produced in Iceland, the remaining
35% is for public use.
The energy profile for Iceland is in many ways unique.
The use of fossil fuels for stationary energy is almost non-
existent in Iceland. The fishing and transportation
sectors use 86 per cent of the oil consumed in Iceland. If
the oil used by Icelandic companies for international
transportation is included, this figure is 90 per cent.
The proportion of energy consumption provided by
renewable energy sources is greater in Iceland than in any
other country. Today geothermal heat and hydropower
account for more than 70 per cent of the country’s
16
2.000
1.500
1.000
500
0
Fish catch by Icelandic vessels 1970–2004
1970 200019951990198519801975
Thou
sand
ton
s
Cod and other demersal fishShrimp, lobster and scallopHerring, capelin and other pelagics
PJ
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
01940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Primary energy consumption in Iceland 1940–2004
Hydropower
Geothermal
Oil
Coal
Thou
sand
ton
s
300
250
200
150
100
50
01982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004
Fishing vessels Automobiles and equipments AirplanesCargo ships Industry Other
Consumption of petroleum products in Iceland 1982–2004
primary energy consumption. In 2004, the total installed
hydropower was 1,154 MW in 31 power plants with a
capacity of 7,130 GWh per year. Installed geothermal
power in six steam turbine plants now amounts to 202
MW or 1,483 GWh per year. Iceland is a world leader in
the use of geothermal energy for domestic and industrial
purposes other than generating electricity. Some 90% of
all homes in Iceland are heated with geothermal energy,
for less than one third of the comparable cost of fossil
fuels or electrical heating.
Three large-scale power stations are now under
construction. Landsvirkjun, the National Power
Company, is building a hydropower plant at Kárahnjúkar
in east Iceland with a capacity of 690 MW to supply
energy to the new Alcoa aluminum smelter at
Reyðarfjörður. Reykjavík Energy and Suðurnes Heating
have three geothermal power stations under construction
and one plant in southwest Iceland is being expanded.
Hydro power developments can have various environ-
mental impacts. The most noticeable is usually connect-
ed with the construction of reservoirs which may be
necessary to store water for the winter season. Such reser-
voirs affect the visual impact of uninhabited wilderness
areas in the highlands, and may inundate vegetated areas.
Other impacts may include disturbance of wildlife habi-
tats, the disappearance or alteration of waterfalls,
reduced sediment transportation in glacial rivers down-
stream from the reservoirs and changed conditions for
fresh-water fishing. Geothermal developments may also
have environmental impacts, among them the drying up
of natural hot springs. Development of high-tempera-
ture fields may cause some air pollution by increasing the
natural H2S emission from the fields.
1.8 IndustryThe largest manufacturing industries in Iceland are
power-intensive industries which produce almost exclu-
sively for export. There has been a considerable increase
in manufacturing exports in recent years. In 2004, manu-
factured products accounted for 36% of total merchan-
dise exports, up from 22% in 1997. Power-intensive
products, mainly aluminum, amounted to 21% of total
merchandise exports in 2004 but 12% in 1997. A number
of small and medium-size enterprises have emerged in
export-oriented manufacturing in recent years, in areas
such as medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, capital
goods for fisheries and food processing. These emerging
industries now account for approximately 2/5 of manu-
factured goods exports.
The largest manufacturing facility at present in Iceland
is an aluminum smelter located near Reykjavík, owned
and operated by Alcan Inc. Its total capacity is now 178
thousand tons per year. Another aluminum smelter is
operated by Norðurál at Grundartangi with a capacity of
92 thousand tons per year. Icelandic Alloys Ltd. is a
ferrosilicon plant with an annual capacity of 120 thou-
sand tons per year. A new aluminum smelter, owned by
Alcoa, is being built on the east coast of Iceland. It is due
to open in late 2007, producing 346 thousand tons per
year at full capacity. The Norðurál plant is also being
expanded from 92 to 260 thousand tons per year by late
2008. When both these projects materialise, the total
production capacity of the aluminum industry in
Iceland will be 785 thousand tons per year, or nearly
three times the present level.
1.9 TransportThe domestic transportation network consists of roads,
air transportation and coastal shipping. Car ownership is
widespread. In 2004, Iceland had 612 passenger cars per
1,000 inhabitants, the third highest ratio among OECD
countries. The road system totals 13,000 km, of which
4,300 km are primary roads.
Three international airlines operate in Iceland, all fully
privately owned. Domestic air travel is an important
mode of transport, with 750,000 passengers in 2004.
Iceland has numerous harbours large enough to handle
international ship traffic, which are without exception
free of ice throughout the year. The two main shipping
lines operate regular liner services to the major ports of
Europe and the US.
1.10 Agriculture, land managementand forestry
Approximately one fifth of the total land area of Iceland is
suitable for fodder production and the raising of live-
stock. Around 6% of this area is cultivated, with the
remainder devoted to raising livestock or left undevel-
oped. Production of meat and dairy products is mainly
17
GWh
14.000
12.000
10.000
8.000
6.000
4.000
2.000
01960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Electricity production in Iceland 1960–2010
Power-intensive industries General consumtion
Estimates for 2005–2010
for domestic consumption. The principal crops have been
hay, potatoes and other root vegetables. Cultivation of
other crops, such as barley and oats, has increased rapidly
in the last 10 years and they are now becoming one of the
staples. Vegetables and flowers are mainly cultivated in
greenhouses heated with geothermal water and steam.
In Iceland the human impact on ecosystems is strong.
The entire island was estimated to be about 65% covered
with vegetation at the time of settlement in the year 874.
Today, Iceland is only about 25% vegetated. This reduc-
tion in vegetative cover is the result of intensive land and
resource utilization by a farming and agrarian society
over 11 centuries. Estimates vary as to the percentage of
the island originally covered with forest and woodlands
at settlement, but a range of 25 to 30% is plausible.
Organised forestry is considered to have started in
Iceland in 1899. Afforestation through planting has
increased considerably since 1990 to over 6 million
seedlings in 2004, which corresponds to an increase in
planted area of 1000–1500 ha per year. Planting of native
birch has been increasing proportionate to the total,
comprising as much as 30% of seedlings planted in some
years. From its limited beginnings in 1970, state support-
ed afforestation on farms has become the main channel
for afforestation activity in Iceland, comprising about
80% of the afforestation effort today. In the late 1980s
semi-natural forest and woodland vegetation covered
only about 1.3% of Iceland amounting to about 117,000
hectares of native birch woodland and 15–20,000
hectares of plantations.
The Soil Conservation Service of Iceland, an agency
under the Ministry of Agriculture, was founded in 1907.
The main tasks of the agency is combating desertification,
sand encroachment and other soil erosion, the promotion
of sustainable land use and reclamation and restoration of
degraded land. A pollen record from Iceland confirms the
rapid decline of birch and the expansion of grasses
between 870–900 AD, a trend that continued to the
present. As early as 1100 more than 90% of the original
Icelandic forest was gone and by 1700 about 40% of the
soils had been washed or blown away. Vast gravel-covered
plains were created where once there was vegetated land.
Ecosystem degradation is one of the largest environmen-
tal problem in Iceland. Vast areas have been desertified
after over-exploitation and the speed of erosion is magni-
fied by volcanic activity and harsh weather conditions.
1.11 WasteAlmost 470,000 tons of waste was generated in 2004,
compared to 315,000 tons in 1995. Today, 71% the waste
is disposed of in landfills, 25% is recycled for purposes
other than energy production, 3% is incinerated for
energy production and the remaining 1% is incinerated
without energy recovery. Per capita waste has steadily
increased in the last decade. Growing consumption
seems to be the main explanation for this trend. The
increase is greater among companies than households.
Waste was responsible for 6% of the total greenhouse gas
emissions in Iceland in the year 2003. Most of these emis-
sions is methane from landfills, but carbon dioxide emis-
sions from incineration do also contribute. Although the
total amount of waste has been increasing, greenhouse
gas emissions from the waste sector have declined due to
more recycling and technological advances in the
handling of waste.
1.12 Other circumstancesThe greenhouse gas emissions profile for Iceland is in
many regards unusual. Three features stand out. First,
emissions from the generation of electricity and from
spatial heating are essentially non-existent since they are
generated from renewable non-emitting energy sources.
Second, more than 80% of emissions from energy come
from mobile sources (transport, mobile machinery and
fishing vessels). The third distinctive feature is that indi-
vidual sources of industrial process emissions have a
significant proportional impact on emissions at the
national level. Most noticeable in this regard is abrupt
increases in emissions from aluminum production
associated with the expanded production capacity of this
industry. This last aspect of Iceland’s emission profile
made it difficult to set meaningful targets for Iceland
during the Kyoto Protocol negotiations. This fact was
acknowledged in Decision 1/CP.3 paragraph 5(d), which
established a process for considering the issue and taking
appropriate action. This process was completed with
Decision 14/CP.7 on the Impact of Single Projects on
Emissions in the Commitment Period (see Annex B).
The problem associated with the significant propor-
tional impact of single projects on emissions is fundamen-
tally a problem of scale. In small economies, single proj-
ects can dominate the changes in emissions from year to
year. When the impact of such projects becomes several
times larger than the combined effects of available green-
house gas abatement measures, it becomes very difficult
for the party involved to adopt quantified emissions limi-
tations. It does not take a large source to strongly influence
the total emissions from Iceland. A single aluminum plant
can add more than 15% to the country’s total greenhouse
gas emissions. A plant of the same size would have negligi-
ble effect on emissions in most industrialized countries.
Decision 14/CP.7 sets a threshold for significant
18
19
proportional impact of single projects at 5% of total
carbon dioxide emissions of a party in 1990. Projects
exceeding this threshold shall be reported separately and
carbon dioxide emissions from them not included in
national totals to the extent that they would cause the
party to exceed its assigned amount. Iceland can there-
fore not transfer assigned amount units to other Parties
through international emissions trading. The total
amount that can be reported separately under this deci-
sion is set at 1.6 million tons of carbon dioxide. The scope
of Decision 14/CP.7 is explicitly limited to small
economies, defined as economies emitting less than
0.05% of the total Annex I carbon dioxide emissions in
1990. In addition to the criteria above, which relate to the
fundamental problem of scale, additional criteria are
included that relate to the nature of the project and the
emission savings resulting from it. Only projects, where
renewable energy is used, and where this use of renew-
able energy results in a reduction in greenhouse gas emis-
sions per unit of production, are eligible. The use of best
environmental practice and best available technology is
also required. It should be underlined that the decision
only applies to carbon dioxide emissions from industrial
processes. Other emissions, such as energy emissions or
process emissions of other gases, such as PFCs, will not be
affected.
Paragraph 4 of Decision 14/CP.7 requests any Party
intending to avail itself of the provisions of that decision
to notify the Conference of the Parties, prior to its eighth
session, of its intention. The Government of Iceland
notified the Conference of the Parties with a letter, dated
October 17. 2002, of its intention to avail itself of the
provisions of Decision 14/CP.7. Iceland has already initi-
ated preparations for the implementation of these
special reporting provisions. This was done to facilitate
evaluation of the emission trends in Iceland and the poli-
cies and measures being implemented or planned. It was
considered more consistent with the intent of 14/CP.7 to
use this approach to reporting also for the period leading
up to the commitment period rather than to introduce
an abrupt change in the reporting approach in 2008. In
the CRF for the year 2003 submitted in May 2005 three
projects fall under the single project definition and are
reported in accordance to Decision 14/CP.7.
20
2.1 Key developments• In 1990, the total emissions of greenhouse gases in
Iceland were 3.282 Gg of CO2- equivalents. In 2003
total emissions, excluding emissions falling under
Decision 14/CP.7, were 3,083 Gg CO2-equivalents.
This is a decrease of 6% over the time period.
• When all emissions are included, the emissions
from 1990 to 2003 have increased by 8%. Total
emissions show a decrease between 1990 and 1994,
with an exception in 1993, and an increase there-
after.
• So far, 1999 has been the year with the highest emis-
sions recorded.
• Between 1990 and 2003 carbon dioxide emissions
increased by 4%; methane emission increased by
14%, and nitrous oxide emissions fell by 16%.
2.2 National system for preparingthe greenhouse gas inventory inIceland
2.2.1 Institutional arrangementThe Environment and Food Agency of Iceland (EFA), an
agency under the Ministry for the Environment,
compiles and maintains the national greenhouse gas
inventory. The LULUCF part of the inventory is an
exception though, as it is compiled by the Agricultural
University of Iceland (AUI). EFA reports to the Ministry
for the Environment, which reports to the Convention.
Figure 2.1 illustrates the flow of information and alloca-
tion of responsibilities.
2.2.2 Process of inventory preparationEFA collects the bulk of data necessary to run the general
emission model, i.e. activity data and emission factors.
Activity data is collected from various institutions and
companies, as well as by EFA directly. AUI receives
information on recultivated area from the Soil
Conservation Service of Iceland and information on
forests and reforestation from the Icelandic Forest
Service. The National Energy Forecast Committee
(NEFC) collects annual information on fuel sales from
the oil companies. Since sales statistics were not provid-
ed by all the oil companies for the year 2003, fuel use by
sector has been estimated by the NEFC. The Icelandic
Association of Farmers (IAF), on the behalf of the
Ministry of Agriculture, is responsible for assessing the
size of the animal population each year. On request from
the EFA the IAF also accounts for young animals that are
mostly excluded from national statistics on animal
population. Statistics Iceland provides information on
imports of solvents, use of fertilizers in agriculture and
imports/exports of fuels. EFA collects various additional
2 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY INFORMATION
Figure 2.1.1
Icelandic Association of Farmers: livestockstatistics including young animals
UNFCCC
Ministry for theEnvironment
reports to the UNFCCC
Environment and FoodAgency(EFA)
Compiles relevantactivity data andemission factors
Runs emission modelsPrepares the CRF tablesReports to the Ministryfor the Environment
Agricultural Universityof Iceland
(AUI)
Calculates the LULUCFsector
Reports to EFA
Importers of cooling agents: report toEFA
Industry: return questionnaires to EFA(activity data, process specific data,
National Energy Forecast Committee:estimate of fuel use by sector
Statistics Iceland: livestock statistics, useof fertilizers, import of fuels and solvents
Soil Conservation Service of Iceland:information on recultivated area
Icelandic Forest Service: information onforests and reforestation
CHAPTER
data directly. Annually a questionnaire is sent out to the
industry in regard to imports, use of feedstock, and
production and process specific information. Importers
of HFCs submit reports on their annual imports by
different types of HFCs to the EFA. EFA also estimates
activity data with regard to waste. Emission factors are
mainly taken from the revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, since limited
information is available from measurements of emis-
sions in Iceland.
2.2.3 Planned and implemented improvementsIn 2004 the UNFCCC secretariat coordinated an in-
country review of the 2004 greenhouse gas inventory
submission of Iceland, in accordance with decision
19/CP.8 of the Conference of the Parties. The expert
review team concluded that the Icelandic emissions
inventory is largely complete and mostly consistent with
the UNFCCC reporting guidelines. However, the expert
review team noted some departures from the UNFCCC
guidelines and a lack of more formal national inventory
procedure. Based on the in-country review report, some
important improvements have already been implement-
ed, and a work plan has been established for improve-
ments that will inevitably take longer time than one year
to implement.
Implemented improvements:
• N2O and CH4 emissions from fuel combustion of
various combustion sources have been estimated.
• N2O emissions from solvent and other product use
have been estimated.
Planned improvements:
• Iceland has until now not prepared a national
energy balance. Following the recommendations
from the In-country review team, Iceland will now
start preparing annually a national energy balance.
• The Ministry for the Environment, in close co-
operation with other relevant ministries will be
establishing a comprehensive institutional and
legal framework to further strengthen the Icelandic
climate change policy. This will include an
improved framework for fulfilling the reporting
requirements under the UNFCCC. This work has
already started and is due to be adopted by the
Icelandic Parliament in 2006.
In the Fourth National Communication, the results for
the period 1990–2003 are presented in the form of
summary tables in Appendix A.
2.3 Greenhouse gas emissions inven-tory and trends
2.3.1 Emissions trends for aggregated green-house gas emissions
The total amount of greenhouse gases emitted in Iceland
during the period 1990 – 2003 is presented in the follow-
ing tables, expressed in terms of contribution by gases
and by sources. Emissions falling under Decision
14/CP.7 are not included in this discussion unless specif-
ically noted.
Table 2.2 presents emissions figures for all direct
greenhouse gas, expressed in CO2-equivalents along with
the percentage change indicated for both the time period
1990 – 2003 and 2002 – 2003.
In 1990, the total emissions of greenhouse gases in
Iceland were 3,282 Gg of CO2- equivalents. In 2003 total
emissions were 3,083 Gg CO2-equivalents, excluding
emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7. This is a 6%
decrease in greenhouse gas emissions over the period
1990–2003. Iceland is on track to meet the emissions
target set for Iceland under the Kyoto Protocol. When all
emissions are included, the total emissions of greenhouse
gases in Iceland have increased by 8% during that same
period. Total emissions show a decrease between 1990
and 1994, with an exception in 1993, and an increase
thereafter. So far, 1999 has been the year with the highest
emissions recorded.
Iceland has experienced economic growth since 1990,
which explains the general growth in emissions. This
has resulted in higher emissions from most sources, but
in particular from transport and industrial processes.
21
Gas 1990 2002 2003 Changes Changes90–03 02–03
CO2 2084 2241 2175 4% -3%
CH4 413 473 472 14% -0,3%N2O 360 308 302 -16% -2%HFC 32 0 0 138%HFC 125 16 26 68%HFC 134a 4 13 254%HFC 143a 16 29 88%HFC 152 0 0 147%CF4 355 61 51 -86% -18%C2F6 65 11 9 -86% -18%SF6 5 5 5 0% 0%Total 3282 3136 3083 -6% -2%CO2 emissions fulfilling14/CP.7 441 451 2%Total emissions,including CO2 emissionsfulfilling 14/CP.7 3282 3577 3534 8% -1%
Table 2.3.1. Emissions of greenhouse gas in Iceland during the period1990–2003 (without LUCF). Empty cells indicate emissions not occurring.
Units: Gg CO2-eq
Since 1990 the number of private cars has been
increasing much faster than the population. Also the
number of passengers using the public transport
system has declined. More traffic is thus not mainly due
to population growth, but much rather because a larger
share of the population owns and uses private cars for
their daily travel. During the late nineties large-scale
industry expanded in Iceland. The existing aluminum
plant and ferroalloy plant were both enlarged in 1997
and 1999 respectively. In 1998 the second aluminum
plant was built and at this stage in time the third one is
under construction. As mentioned before industrial
process carbon dioxide emissions from a single project
falling under decision 14/CP.7 are to be reported sepa-
rately and are therefore not included in national totals.
Today three projects, the two aluminum plants and the
ferroalloy plant, do fall under the single project defini-
tion and are reported in accordance with Decision
14/CP.7.
Methane emissions have increased between 1990 and
2003 mainly due to increasing amount of landfilled
waste. Nitrous oxide emissions have, however, decreased
since 1990, despite the fact that nitrous oxide emissions
from road transport have increased. This is due to a
decrease in animal livestock and because fertilizer
production in Iceland was terminated in 2001.
Before 1992 there were no imports of HFCs, but since
then, imports have increased rapidly in response to the
phase-out of CFCs and HCFCs. The potential emissions
of HFCs have risen from 0.5 Gg CO2-equivalent in 1990
to 69.3 Gg CO2-equivalent in 2003.
The increasing emissions of carbon dioxide from
transport and industrial processes and increasing
methane emissions from landfilled waste has to some
extent been counteracted by decreased emissions of
PFCs. This decrease is caused by improved technology
and process control in the aluminum industry.
2.3.2 Emissions trends by gasFigure 2.3.2a illustrates that the largest greenhouse gas
contributor in Iceland is CO2, followed by CH4 and N2O,
and finally the three fluorinated gases PFCs, HFCs and
SF6. Figure 2.3.2b illustrates the percentage change in
emissions of greenhouse gases by gas in Iceland from
1990 to 2003.
Carbon dioxide (CO2)Fisheries, road transport and industrial processes are the
main sources of CO2 emissions in Iceland. Emissions
from the generation of electricity and from spatial
heating are essentially non-existent, since they are
generated from renewable non-emitting energy sources.
Therefore, emissions from stationary combustion are
dominated by industrial sources in Iceland. ‘Other
sources’ consist mainly of emissions from the construc-
tion industry. Figure 2.3.2c illustrates the distribution of
CO2 emissions by source categories, and figure 2.3.2d
shows the percentage change in emissions of CO2 by
source from 1990 to 2003.
In 2003 the total CO2 emissions in Iceland, excluding
emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7, were 2,175 Gg.
This is a decrease of about 3% from the preceding year
but an increase of about 4% from 1990. The decrease in
emissions between 2002 and 2003 can be explained by a
6% decrease in emissions from fisheries and 17%
decrease from stationary combustion. Emissions from
road vehicles increased by 4% between 2002 and 2003.
The increase in CO2 emissions between 1990 and 2003
can be explained by increased emissions from road trans-
22
Figure 2.3.2a. Distribution of emissions of greenhouse gases by gas in2003
CH415%
N2O10%
Fluorinatedgases4%
CO271%
Figure 2.3.2b. Percentage change in emissions of greenhouse gases bygas 1990–2003
40%
20%
0%
-20%
-40%
-60%
-80%
-100%
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
CO2 CH4 N2O Fluorinated gases
port. In the 1990s the number of road vehicles in Iceland
nearly doubled and emission of CO2 increased by 23%
during the same period. Emissions from fishing in 2003
were at the same level as in 1990 and emissions from
other sources as well as industrial processes declined
from 1990 to 2003. The total CO2 emissions from indus-
trial processes have increased by 110% from 1990 to
2003, when emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7 are
included.
Methane (CH4)Figure 2.3.2e shows that emissions of methane originate
from waste treatment and agriculture respectively.
Figure 2.3.2f shows the percentage change in emissions of
CH4 by source from 1990 to 2003. The emissions from
agriculture have decreased. Emissions from waste treat-
ment show a steady increase from 1990 to 2001. This is
due to an increased amount of waste generated and
increased ratio of landfilled wastes in managed waste
disposal sites. The emissions from landfills have been
decreasing since 2001 due to increased methane recovery
from landfill sites. In the same way the overall emissions
of methane gradually increase from 1990 to 1999 but
decrease thereafter.
Nitrous oxide (N2O)Figure 2.3.2g shows that agriculture accounts for
around 80% of N2O emissions in Iceland, with agricul-
tural soils as the largest contributor. The second most
important source is road transport, which has increased
rapidly after the use of catalytic converters in all new
vehicles became obligatory in 1995. The overall N2O
emissions decreased by 15% from 1990 to 2003, due to
a decrease in the number of animal livestock and
because fertilizer production in Iceland was terminated
in 2001.
23
Figure 2.3.2c. Distribution of CO2 emissions by source in 2003
Road vehicles29%
Stationary combustion, oil10%
Industrialprocesses
17%
Other12%Fishing
31%
Figure 2.3.2d. Percentage changes in emissions of CO2 by major sources1990–2003
FishingIndustrial processes
Road vehiclesOther
Stationary combustion, oil19
9019
9119
9219
9319
9419
9519
9619
9719
9819
9920
0020
0120
0220
03
50%
30%
10%
-10%
-30%
-50%
Figure 2.3.2e. Distribution of CH4 emissions by source in 2003
Agriculture54%
Landfills45%
Other1%
Figure 2.3.2f. Percentage changes in emissions of CH4 by major sources1990–2003
90%
70%
50%
30%
10%
-10%
-30%
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Agriculture Landfills Other
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)The emissions of the perfluorocarbons, tetrafluo-
romethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6) from the
aluminum industry were 50.6 and 9.2 Gg CO2-equiva-
lents respectively in 2003. The total emissions of PFCs
decreased by 86% in 1990 – 2003. Emissions decreased
steadily from 1990 to 1996 with the exception of 1995. In
1997 and 1998 the emissions increased again due to the
enlargement of the existing aluminum plant in 1997 and
the establishment of a new aluminum plant in 1998.
From 1998 the emissions show again a steady downward
trend. PFCs emissions reduction is caused by improved
technology and process control, which has led to a 95%
decrease in the amount of PFCs emitted per ton of
aluminum produced during the period of 1990 – 2003.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)The total potential emissions of HFCs, used as substi-
tutes for ozone depleting substances, amounted to 69.3
Gg CO2-equivalents in 2003. The import of HFCs started
in 1992 and increased until 1998. Since then annual
imports have ranged been between 30 and 70 Gg CO2-
equivalents. Sufficient data is not available to calculate
actual emissions. This means that only the potential
emiss ions , based on
imports, are estimated.
The potential method is
likely to overestimate
emissions, since the chem-
icals tend to be emitted
over a period of several
years. The application
category refrigeration,
contributes by far the
largest part of HFCs emis-
sions in Iceland.
Sulphur hexafluorid (SF6)Sulphur hexafluorid emissions are not estimated but
held constant over the whole time series. The largest
source of SF6 emissions is thought to be leakages from
electrical equipment.
24
Figure 2.3.2g. Distribution of N2O emissions by source in 2003
Agriculture78%
Other12%
Road traffic10%
Figure 2.3.2h. Emissions of PFCs from 1990 to 2003
Gg C
O 2-e
quiv
alen
ts
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
CF4 C2F6
Figure 2.3.2i. Emissions of HFCs from 1990 to 2003
Gg C
O 2-e
quiv
alen
ts
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
HCF 125 HCF 134a HCF 143a
Table 2.3.3. Total emissions of greenhouse gases by sources and CO2 removals from LUCF in Iceland, 1990–2003. Gg CO2-equivalents
1990 2002 2003 Changes 90-03 Changes 02-03Energy 1704 1916 1861 9 -3Industrial Processes 867 495 509 3Emissions fulfilling14/CP.7* 441 451 2Solvent Use 6 4 4 -33 0Agriculture 571 503 489 -14 -3LUCF -8 -193 -208 8Waste 134 217 220 64 1
Total emissions (without lucf) 3282 3136 3083 -6 -2Total net emissions (with lucf) 3274 2943 2876 -12 -2* Industrial process carbon dioxide emissions fulfilling decision 14/CP.7 are not included in national totals
2.3.3 Emissions trends by sourceThe largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in
Iceland is the energy sector, followed by industrial
processes, agriculture, waste and solvent and other
product use. From 1990 to 2003 the contribution of the
energy sector to the total net emissions increased from
52% to 60%. At the same time the contribution from
industrial processes decreased from 26% in 1990 to 17%
in 2003. If all industrial process emissions in 2003 are
included, that is including emissions falling under
Decision 14/CP.7, the contribution of industrial process-
es to total emissions is 27% and the contribution of the
energy sector is 53%.
Figure 2.3.3a illustrates the distribution of greenhouse
gas emissions by UNFCCC sector categories in 2003,
excluding emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7.
Emissions from the energy sector account for 60% of the
national total emissions and industrial processes and
agriculture account for 17% and 16% respectively. The
waste sector accounts for 7% and solvent and other
product use for 0.1%.
Figure 2.3.3b illustrates the distribution of greenhouse
gas emissions by UNFCCC sector categories in 2003,
including emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7. In
this case the emissions from the energy sector account for
53% of the national total emissions, industrial processes
account for 27% and 14% originates from agriculture.
The waste sector accounts for 6% and solvent and other
product use for 0.1%.
EnergyThe energy sector in Iceland is unique in many ways. In
2000 the per capita energy use was close to 500 MJ.
Energy use per capita is high in Iceland, even in compari-
son with other industrial countries. The proportion of
25
Figure 2.3.3a. Emissions of greenhouse gases by UNFCCC sector categoriesin 2003, excluding emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7
Industrial progresses17%
Energy60%
Agriculture16%
waste7%
Solvent and otherproduct use: 0,1%
Figure 2.3.3b. Emissions of greenhouse gases by UNFCCC sector categoriesin 2003, including emissions falling under Decision 14/CP.7
Agriculture14%
Waste6%
Industrial progcesses27%
Energy53%
Solvent and otherproduct use: 0,1%
Figure 2.3.3c. Greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector in 2003,distributed by source categories
Transport37%
Manufacturingind./construction
24%
Other sectors38%
Energy industries1%
Figure 2.3.3d. Percentage changes in emissions in various source categoriesin the energy sector, 1990–2003
90%
70%
50%
30%
10%
-10%
-30%
-50%
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Energy Transport
Total
Manufacturing ind./construction
Other sectors
domestic renewable energy in the total energy budget is
on the other hand also high or 70%. This is much higher
level of renewable energy than in any other industrialized
country. The cold climate and sparse population calls for
high energy use for spatial heating and transport. Iceland
relies heavily on geothermal energy for spatial heating
and on hydropower and geothermal for electricity
production. Figure 2.3.3c shows the distribution of emis-
sions in 2003 in different source categories. The percent-
age changes detected in the different source categories in
the energy sector between 1990 and 2003, compared with
1990 are illustrated in figure 2.3.3d.
Emissions from all source categories except energy
industries and the sector ‘other sources’ have increased
during the period. The peak in the energy industries in
1998 was due to unusual weather condition during the
winter of 1997/1998, which led to unfavorable water
conditions for the hydropower plants reservoirs. This
created shortage of electricity, which was compensated
by using oil for electricity and heat production. Increased
emissions from the manufacturing industries and
construction source category are explained by the
increased activity in the construction sector during the
period.
Fisheries dominate the ‘other sector’. Emissions
from fisheries rose from
1990 to 1996 because a
substantial portion of the
fishing fleet was operating
in distant fishing grounds.
From 1996, the emissions
decreased again reaching
1990 levels in 2001. Emis-
sions increased again by
10% between 2001 and
2002. In 2003 emissions
reached again the 1990
level. Annual changes in
emissions reflect the inher-
ent nature of the fishing
industry.
In the 1990s the vehicle fleet in Iceland almost
doubled. This has led to increased emissions from the
transport sector, a trend that is still ongoing. Further-
more, the latest trend has been towards larger passen-
ger cars, which consume more fuel. Since 1999 the
average fuel consumption of newly registered passen-
ger cars has increased by over 6%. A decrease in ship
transport and aviation has however compensated the
effect of rising emissions from road transport to some
extend.
Industrial processesProduction of raw materials is the main source of process
related industrial emissions for both CO2 and other
greenhouse gases such as N2O and PFCs. The industrial
process sector accounts for about 17% of the national
greenhouse gas emissions, excluding emissions falling
under Decision 14/CP.7 and about 27% of the total
national greenhouse gas emissions. As can be seen from
figure 2.3.3e emissions decreased from 1990 to 1996,
mainly because of decrease in PFC-emissions. During the
late nineties large-scale industry expanded in Iceland.
The existing aluminum plant and the ferroalloys industry
experienced enlargement in 1997 and 1999, and in 1998
another aluminum plant was built. This led to an increase
in industrial process emissions. As mentioned before
industrial process carbon dioxide emissions from a single
project falling under Decision 14/CP.7 are to be reported
separately and are not included in national totals.
Industrial process emissions, excluding emissions fulfill-
ing decision 14/CP.7, have decreased since 1999.
Metal production is the dominating category within the
industrial process sector, accounting for 88% of the
sector’s emissions in 1990 and 81% in 2003. Aluminum
production is the main source of emission within the
metal production, accounting for 39% of the total indus-
trial process emissions, excluding emissions falling under
Decision 14/CP.7, and 48% including all industrial
process emissions. The production technology in the
aluminum plants in Iceland is based on prebaked anode
cells. The main energy source is electricity, and industrial
process CO2 is mainly resulting from the anodes during
the electrolysis. In addition, the production of aluminum
gives rise to emissions of PFCs. From 1990 to 1996 PFC
emissions decreased by 94%. Because of the enlargement
26
Figure 2.3.3e. Total greenhouse gas emissions in the industrial process sector, 1990–2003
Gg C
O 2-e
quiv
alen
ts
1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20031994 2002
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Mineral products Metal production Emissions fulfilling 14/CP.7Chemical industry Consumption of HFCs and CF6
of the existing aluminum
plant in 1997 and the estab-
lishment of a new aluminum
plant in 1998 emissions
increased again from 1997 to
1999, but have decreased
since. In 2003 the emissions
had decreased by 86% from
the 1990 level. The reduc-
tion in PFC emissions was
effectuated by improved
technology and process
control. PFC emissions per
ton aluminum produced
went from 4.78 tons CO2-
equivalents, in 1990, to 0.22
tons CO2-equivalents in
2003. Production of ferroal-
loys is another major source
of emission within the metal
production. The use of coal
and coke as reducing agents
and the use of electrodes is
the main source of CO2
emission from the produc-
tion. In 1998 a power short-
age caused a temporary
closure of the ferroalloy
plant, resulting in excep-
tionally low emissions that
year. In 1999, however, the
existing plant was expanded and emissions have therefore
increased considerably. These emissions fall under Deci-
sion 14/CP.7 and are reported separately.
Production of minerals is the sector’s second most
important category, accounting for 7% of the emissions
in 2003. Cement production is the dominant contribu-
tor. Cement is produced in one plant in Iceland, emitting
CO2 derived from carbon in the shell sand used as raw
material in the process. Emissions from the cement
industry reached a peak in 2000 but have declined since,
partly due to increased imports of cement. Production of
fertilizers used to be the main contributor to the process
emissions from the chemical industry. The production
was terminated in 2001.
AgricultureGreenhouse gas emissions from agriculture in Iceland
comprise emissions of methane and nitrous oxide. The
greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector
accounted for 16% of the overall greenhouse gas emis-
sions in 2003. The largest sources for agricultural green-
house gas emissions are CH4 from enteric fermentation
and N2O from agricultural soils. Emissions from agricul-
ture have been relatively stable over the last couple of
years, with emissions levels of around 500 Gg CO2-equiv-
alents per year. From 1990 – 2003 emissions decreased by
11%, mainly due to decreasing number of livestock.
WasteThe emissions of greenhouse gases (CH4) from landfills
increased by 62% from 1990 to 2003. There are two main
reasons for this. First, increasing amount of waste is
being landfilled and second, a larger percentage of that
waste is landfilled in managed waste disposal sites. The
amount of landfilled waste increased by 39% over the
period. The percentage of waste in managed waste
disposal landfill sites increased from 39% in 1990 to
being close to 100% in 2003. Since methane production
rate is higher for managed waste disposal sites than for
unmanaged sites, the emissions have increased. The
27
Figure 2.3.3f. Total greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, 1990–2003
Gg C
O 2-e
quiv
alen
ts
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20031994 2002
Enteric fermentation Manure management Agricultural soils
Figure 2.3.3g. Emissions of greenhouse gases in the waste sector, 1990–2003
Gg C
O 2-e
quiv
alen
ts
1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20031994 2002
250
200
150
100
50
0
Landfills Waste incineration
28
emissions from landfills show a decrease from 2001 to
2003, due to increasing amount of methane recovered.
Methane recovery was initiated in 1997 and the annual
amount recovered has increased steadily since. Emissions
from waste incineration have decreased constantly since
1990 since the total amount of waste being incinerated
has been decreasing. Also, since a higher percentage of
incinerated waste has concurrently been incinerated with
energy recovery it is reported under public electricity and
heat production.
29
3.1 Iceland’s commitments andclimate change strategy
In March 2002, the Icelandic Government adopted a
new climate change strategy, aimed at ensuring that
Iceland would meet its obligations according to the
Kyoto Protocol. In April, the Icelandic Parliament
approved a motion authorizing the government to
ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Iceland deposited its instru-
ments of ratification of the Kyoto Protocol on May 23,
2002. Iceland’s obligations according to the Kyoto
Protocol are as follows:
• For the first commitment period, from 2008 to
2012, greenhouse gas emissions shall not increase
more than 10% from the level of emissions in 1990.
• For the first commitment period, from 2008 to
2012, the mean annual carbon dioxide emissions
falling under decision 14/CP.7 on the “Impact of
single project on emissions in the commitment
period” shall not exceed 1,600,000 tons.
3.2 Policy development process The Ministry for the Environment formulated the 2002
climate change strategy in close collaboration with the
ministries of Transport and Communications, Fisheries,
Finance, Agriculture, Industry and Commerce, Foreign
Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Office. The aim of the
strategy is to curb emissions of greenhouse gases so that
they do not exceed the limits of Iceland’s obligations
under the Kyoto Protocol. A second objective is to
increase the level of carbon sequestration resulting from
reforestation and revegetation programs. The strategy
was to be reviewed in the year 2005, “if deemed neces-
sary”. In 2005, an interministerial consultative commit-
tee on climate affairs began a review of the climate change
strategy, with a view to draft a new strategy with a
broader mandate, focusing not only on meeting Kyoto
targets, but also to address such issues as adaptation and
long-term focus on cutting emissions and increasing
carbon sequestration.
Iceland’s current strategy for sustainable development,
“Welfare for the Future”, was approved by the govern-
ment in July 2002. It provides a framework for sustain-
able development for the next two decades, setting up
seventeen key long-term objectives, planned short-term
measures to implement those objectives, and indicators
to measure success. One key objective is mitigating
climate change, and another is to increase further the
share of renewable energy in the energy mix. The strategy
is to be reviewed every four years, with the indicators and
the short-term measures to be updated. In November
2005, Iceland’s fourth Environmental Assembly, a
national gathering of stakeholders in the field of the envi-
ronment and sustainable development, reviewed the
strategy and discussed a draft plan for priorities in the
period 2006–2009.
Iceland has two administrative levels, and local author-
ities work alongside the central government in imple-
menting many of the climate-related policies. In some
fields, like waste management, the local governments
have a key role. In recent years Icelandic municipalities
have done considerable work in forming their own
sustainable development policy under the label of Local
Agenda 21.
3.3 Key measures in emissionsreduction
This section gives an overview of the policies and meas-
ures listed in the 2002 Climate Change Strategy, and aims
to give a qualitative indication of the effect they have had,
or will likely have, to decrease emissions of greenhouse
gases and increase carbon sequestration.
3.3.1 The energy sector Iceland’s energy situation is quite different than is the
case in most developed countries. Almost all stationary
energy is produced from renewable sources, and over
70% of the total primary energy supply. Most GHG
3 POLICIES AND MEASURES
CHAPTER
emissions from energy come from mobile sources
(transport on land and fishing vessels), where cuts in
emissions are generally considered more difficult to
achieve than from stationary energy sources. Iceland’s
2002 strategy for sustainable development, Welfare for
the future, states the goal of decreasing the share of fossil
fuels even further in coming decades. The aim is that
transport will use energy from renewable energy
resources as soon as it is technologically and economical-
ly feasible to do so.
3.3.2 The transportation sector Transportation is a growing source of greenhouse gas
emissions in Iceland. In 2003 the transport sector was
responsible for 20% of total GHG emissions in the
country, while it was 19% in 1990.
One of the main measures listed in the Icelandic
climate change policy is a change in the taxation system
that will provide added incentives for the use of small
diesel cars. Diesel-powered jeeps are common in Iceland,
but almost all smaller cars use gasoline. As of recently,
owners of diesel cars paid a special tax every year,
depending on the weight of their vehicle, with a choice of
paying a fixed tax or a mileage tax. In July 2005, this
system was scrapped in favour of a simple tax on diesel
fuel, which was set at a level so that it would lower the tax
for the average owner of a diesel car. This change is
expected to result in a transfer of around 10% of current
gasoline use to the use of diesel fuel, resulting in a
decrease in GHG emission by 2010, given the fact that
diesel-powered cars emit on average about 14% less CO2
than gasoline-powered cars of the same size. The change
from the weight tax to fuel tax has not been seen to have a
big initial effect to stimulate the buying of diesel cars. Part
of the explanation is seen to be that the price of diesel fuel
was unusually high at the time of the introduction of the
fuel tax, reducing the incentive to switch from gasoline to
diesel, even if the Ministry of Finance actually reduced
the fuel tax rate from initial plans due to the high market
price. News stories focused on the price hike of diesel
fuel, and rarely mentioned the scrapping of the weight
tax instead, so that many got the impression that the
effect of the change was to discourage the buying of
diesel-powered cars, rather than the opposite. The
general trend in Iceland has also recently been in the
direction of buying bigger cars with less fuel economy,
suggesting that fuel efficiency is not a prime concern for
buyers. Nevertheless, it is projected that in the long run
the change will have the effect of encouraging the buying
of diesel cars.
Another measure listed in the 2002 strategy is the
reduction of import fees on vehicles using low-pollution
engines. This has been implemented in two steps, the
second one occurring in 2005. Today, vehicles that are
totally or almost pollution-free, such as electric vehicles
or hydrogen-powered vehicles, are exempted from
paying import fees, which are 45% on most passenger
cars. This exemption is valid until 2008, and can be
renewed at that date. Vehicles with hybrid engines and
methane-powered vehicles pay 240,000 ISK (around
US$ 3,000) less in import fees than other cars, a rebate
valid at least until the end of 2006. To date, these actions
have not led to a big increase in the use of such vehicles.
The import of hybrid cars is controlled by a quota by
producers, so that any effect of the economic incentives
would come in the future. Few electric vehicles are on the
road in Iceland, and only about 50 methane-powered
vehicles. Hydrogen-powered cars and buses have been
imported and used in research projects, but they are not
commercially competitive yet. The effect on emissions
has thus been negligible to date, and for the sake of
caution, no effect of this measure has been estimated in
the future. Nevertheless, this is an important symbolic
step, which could produce meaningful and measurable
results in some years. A continuation of the lower rates
for low-pollution and pollution-free cars should lead to a
quicker introduction of such vehicles when they become
more easily available and commercially competitive.
Other transportation-related policies are listed in the
climate change strategy. In several instances distances
between places have been decreased with the construc-
tion of new roads and tunnels; this has the effect of
reducing emissions per trip, but this can possibly be
cancelled out by increased traffic due to the reduced
travel-time. It is difficult to calculate the net effect of
these measures, and no estimates on emission reductions
have been made. As for measures to strengthen public
transport in Iceland, the abandoning of the weight-tax
on diesel-powered vehicles in favour of a fuel tax should
be beneficial to buses used in public transport. Public
transport in the Reykjavik metropolitan area has, how-
ever, seen steadily declining ridership, despite efforts to
improve and rationalize the route system. The main
explanation for this seems to be that in the fast-growing
economy in recent years there has been a great increase in
the number of passenger cars, with a corresponding
decline in the use of other forms of transport. The
Icelandic Road Authority has done work in increasing
coordination of traffic lights, which has a small but posi-
tive effect in reducing emissions; this is however not esti-
mated or included in calculations on emission reduc-
tions.
30
3.3.3 The fisheries sector The fisheries sector is one of the biggest sectors in terms
of GHG emissions in Iceland. The use of fossil fuels for
fishing vessels was responsible for 19% of total GHG
emissions in the year 2003, and had decreased by 1%
from 1990. Use of HFCs in cooling systems onboard
fishing vessels is also a source of GHG emissions. As is the
case with transport on land, reductions in emissions
from fishing vessels are difficult to achieve. The fishing
industry points to the fact that it is not subsidised, unlike
fisheries in many European and other countries, and that
this means that there is a greater incentive to save fuel and
minimize emissions per ton or value-unit of fish. The
system of individual transferable quotas in the Icelandic
fishing industry also contributes to fuel-saving and lower
emissions, it is claimed, as each company aims to get its
quota in the most economical way; while time limitation
of fisheries, to take an example of another common way
of fisheries management, has a built-in incentive for
vessels to spend as much time at sea as possible in the
time allocated. While these arguments have a certain
logic, there is a lack of comparable studies of fishing
industries in different countries, and fishing manage-
ment systems, to back them up with concrete facts, such
as emissions per ton or value-unit in shared or compara-
ble fisheries.
As for measures to reduce emissions from the fishing
sector, there has been government support, through
research funding and public procurement, for the devel-
opment and introduction of a fuel-saving system for
fishing vessels and other ships, that has been developed by
an Icelandic company. This fuel-saving system has inter
alia been set up in a new research vessel of the Marine
Research Institute, and will also be set up in a new coast
guard ship. Early results show that savings of 10% or more
in fuel use and emissions are possible with the fuel-saving
system. In general, the renewal of the fishing fleet tends to
lead to new energy-efficient ships replacing older ones;
this trend, however, is driven by economic concerns by
the industry rather than government measures.
The processing of fish and seafood on land is a relative-
ly small source of greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland,
with the exception of the fishmeal industry, which uses
oil along with electricity generated from renewable
energy sources. There have been limited government
measures to reduce emissions from the fishmeal indus-
try, but there has been a steady trend towards lowering
emissions, largely because of investment by the industry
itself in better and cleaner technology. In 1990, about 60
tons of oil were used to process each ton of fish, but in
2003, only 35 tons of oil were used on average. This was
partly achieved by the fact that the government-owned
national power company allowed the fishmeal factories
to buy electricity – generated by hydro and geothermal
energy – at special prices, encouraging the substition of
oil burners by electrical heaters. A new law from 2003 on
electricity generation and distribution make such special
arrangements more difficult, because of the introduction
of European Economic Area competition rules. Some
fishmeal companies have reacted by investing in new and
more fuel-efficient technology.
Currently the use of HFCs is banned in Iceland, with
the exception of use for cooling systems and in certain
medical applications. The fisheries and fish processing
industries are the main users of HFCs. Many larger
processing plants use NH3 as a cooling agent, but smaller
plants and ships commonly use HFCs.
3.3.4 Industrial processes Industrial processes in energy-intensive industries
accounted for 27% of total GHG emissions in Iceland in
the year 2003, but had accounted for 26% in 1990. This
includes CO2 emissions from two projects that would
meet the criteria of falling under Decision 14/CP.7.
Excluding these emissions, the share of industrial
processes was 17% in 2003, with 451 Gg of CO2 falling
under Decision 14/CP.7.
PFC emissions from energy-intensive industries do
not fall under Decision 14/CP.7, and climate-related
policies in the industrial sector are primarily focused on
limiting PFC emissions. Herein is the greatest success
story so far in reducing GHG emissions in Iceland. The
2002 climate change strategy sets the goal of PFC emis-
sions from aluminum smelters at 0.14 tons of CO2 equiv-
alents. The aluminum plants have achieved their goal by
improving technology in continuing production, and by
introducing Best Available Technology in new produc-
tion. This can be seen as an ambitious goal, since the
results of the 2003 analysis by the International Alu-
minium Institute show that the median PFC emissions
level for aluminum smelters is 0.38 tons of CO2 equiva-
lents, and the average number is still higher. The 2003
survey is the sixth in a series of surveys conducted by the
International Aluminium Institute, covering anode
effect data from global aluminum producers over the
period from 1990 through 2003. PFC emissions from the
aluminum smelter in Straumsvík have decreased by over
40% from 1990 to 2003, despite production increasing at
the same time by more than 70%. PFC emissions from
the Nordurál smelter in Hvalfjörður, which started
production in 1998, were quite high at the start, as is
31
normally the case, but are today less than 0.14 tons of
CO2 equivalents per ton of aluminum.
It is difficult to estimate how much lower emissions are
today than they would have been with business-as-usual.
One way would be to use the PFC emissions per ton of
aluminum from the Straumsvik plant in 1990, and
continue to use that rate for later years for both that plant
and new plants, and compare it with actual data. This
would yield a huge calculated benefit. This method
would, however, be questionable, as emissions per ton
would most probably have decreased because of new
technology and demands for reduced emissions because
of health concerns. It is doubtful, though, that the reduc-
tions would have been as great as is the case without the
climate change policy. One way to estimate emissions
savings is to compare the median emission levels from
the 2003 analysis by the International Aluminium
Institute with the Icelandic data from 2003 and estimates
of PFC emissions in 2008–2012. These calculations show
a net saving of 65 Gg in 2005 and projected 161–187 Gg
in annual net reduction of emissions in 2008–2012.
3.3.5 The waste sector GHG emissions from the waste sector were 6% of total
GHG emissions in 2003, but were 4% in 1990. Most of
these emissions are methane from landfills.
The total amount of waste has been increasing in
recent years. The most important measure to reduce
GHG emissions from waste is the collection of methane
from the largest landfill in the country, serving all of the
greater Reykjavík area, which started in 1997. The
government climate change policy states the goal of
further reducing waste disposal, especially in terms of
organic waste. Icelandic Waste Management Law and
regulations on waste treatment transpose the following
targets into Icelandic law (the baseline is 1995): i) to re-
duce the total weight of organic household waste to be
landfilled by 25 per cent no later than January 2009, by 50
per cent no later than June 2013, and by 65 per cent no
later than June 2020; ii) to reduce the total weight of
other organic waste, such as biodegradable organic waste
to be landfilled, by 25 per cent no later than January 2009,
by 50 per cent no later than June 2013 and by 65 per cent
no later than June 2020. A second objective of the climate
change policy is to increase the collection of landfill gas
for energy recovery and environmental control.
Currently, SORPA, an independent waste management
firm owned by seven municipalities, collects methane
from Reykjavik-area landfill. The methane is either
flared, processed for car fuel, or burned for electricity
production. About 50 vehicles are run on methane from
the landfill, but it is estimated that the gas from the land-
fill could power 4,000–6,000 cars annually.
3.3.6 The agriculture sector The 2002 climate change strategy does not contain goals
for emission reductions in agriculture, which was seen as
a relatively minor source of emissions. In 2004, however,
agriculture emissions were reestimated, as some data
were corrected and calculation methods improved. This
yielded the results that emissions from agriculture were
considerably greater than previously thought, and that
they were some 17% of total emissions in 1990 and 14%
in 2003. As of yet, measures to reduce these emissions
have not been identified, but the current review of the
climate change strategy will address possible measures in
agriculture in light of the improved knowledge of their
contribution.
Recent research indicates that drained wetlands for
agriculture are a significant source of CO2-emissions.
These emissions have not been included in calculations
of annual anthropogenic emissions from Iceland, as they
result, with a few exceptions, from activities undertaken
before 1990, even if some of the land is currently used for
crop cultivation or animal grazing. The discovery of this
apparently significant emission source indicates that the
reclamation of wetlands can help stop the emission of
CO2, and even sequester carbon in vegetation and soil. In
the draft update of Iceland’s national strategy on
sustainable development, increased reclamation of
wetlands is listed as a priority measure for the mitigation
of climate change in the period 2006–2009.
3.4 Carbon sequestration Revegetation and reforestation is a high priority in
Iceland, and there is significant potential to enhance
carbon sequestration beyond the present level. In 1996
the Icelandic government announced its decision to allo-
cate ISK 450 million for a four-year program of revegeta-
tion and tree planting to increase the sequestration of
carbon dioxide in the biomass. This program was imple-
mented in 1997–2000. The stated goal was an increase of
22,000 tons in carbon sequestration. Assessment of the
results of the program indicates that the total additional
sequestration was 27,000 tons. Although this four-year
program is over, efforts to increase the annual carbon
sequestration rate resulting from reforestation and
revegetation programs will continue in the future. A new
strategic plan for soil conservation and revegetation,
adopted by the Icelandic Parliament in the spring of
2002, lists carbon sequestration as one of the four main
objectives of the strategy. The strategic plan covers the
32
period of 2003 to 2014. The parliament has also adopted
a five year plan of action for the forestry sector, where
attention is given to carbon sequestration. The Ministry
of Agriculture is responsible for implementation is this
area.
3.5 Research and development The government policy on climate change emphasizes
the importance of research and development and specif-
ically lists the following actions:
• Emphasis on improving methods to estimate
carbon sequestration and to create a reporting
system to improve both inventory and projection
estimates.
• Research and development to increase the use of
environmentally friendly energy.
• Exploring ways to curb emissions from the trans-
port sector.
• Experiments with alternative energy that could
replace fossil fuels will continue, as well as research
on fuel cells and hydrogen as energy carrier.
Implementation of policies related to research and devel-
opment is a joint responsibility of all ministries.
Discussion on research and development is provided in
more detail in Chapter 7.
3.6 Information and public aware-ness
Increased emphasis on information and public aware-
ness is one of the seven main components of the Icelandic
climate policy. The government policy stresses the need
to inform the public about options available to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions on a day-to-day basis by mini-
mizing waste, altering travel habits and increasing fuel
efficiency. The government already supports some proj-
ects organized by environmental NGOs, whose aim is to
encourage environmentally responsible behavior.
Information about ways consumers can reduce GHG
emissions in their everyday lives is integrated into these
projects. The ministries are jointly responsible for
encouraging education and increasing awareness.
Further discussion about public education is to be found
in Chapter 8.
3.7 Other measures In addition to measures specifically taken to limit GHG
emissions domestically, the Icelandic climate policy
discusses other commitments, such as inventory infor-
mation for carbon sequestration, emissions trading, and
financial support to developing countries. According to
the climate policy, a nationwide inventory system on
carbon sequestration should be implemented no later
than 2007, as called for in the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto
Protocol also deals with emissions trading. Iceland’s
intention to take advantage of Decision 14/CP.7, limits
its options for participating in emissions trading with
other countries. Each country is free to decide whether a
domestic system of emissions trading is a feasible option.
In the Icelandic case, this is not considered an attractive
option for the time being. Financial support to develop-
ing countries is another important aspect of the
UNFCCC. Relevant in this respect is a declaration from a
group of states (the EU, Canada, New Zealand, Norway
and Iceland) that they would be willing to provide addi-
tional support to developing countries equal to USD 410
million no later than 2005. Financial assistance will be
discussed in more detail in Chapter 6.
33
34
4.1 IntroductionProjections for greenhouse gas emissions until 2020 have
been made, taking into account the climate change strat-
egy adopted by the Icelandic Government in 2002. The
climate change strategy from 2002 is aimed at ensuring
that Iceland will meet its obligations according to the
Kyoto Protocol. The projections are “with measures”,
while no projections “with additional measures” have
been made as Iceland expects to meet its commitments
under the Kyoto Protocol.
The lead agency in producing the projections is the
Environment and Food Agency, which is also responsible
for Iceland’s greenhouse gas emissions inventory. The
Environment and Food Agency cooperated with the
Energy Forecast Committee during the preparation of the
projections. The Energy Forecast Committee is responsi-
ble for making projections about energy consumption in
Iceland and has representatives from companies, institu-
tions and organizations involved in the energy sector. The
greenhouse gas emissions projections are based on the
energy forecast for fossil fuels that was published in
September 2005. Two scenarios are described in this
chapter, depending on the level of increase in new energy-
intensive industry in Iceland until 2020. Both scenarios are
calculated excluding estimations on carbon sequestration
by afforestation and revegetation.
4.2 Scenarios and key assumptionsScenario 1 assumes no additions to energy-intensive
industries other than those already in progress in
2004/2005, meaning the enlargement of the Century
Aluminum plant in Hvalfjörður and the building of the
Alcoa aluminum plant in Reyðarfjörður.
Scenario 2 is based on the assumption that all energy-
intensive projects which currently have an operational
license will be built, which means four new projects in
addition to the two projects already included in scenario
1. This includes an enlargement of the Alcan aluminum
plant in Straumsvík, an enlargement of the Icelandic
Alloys ferrosilicon plant in Hvalfjörður, a further
enlargement of the Century Aluminum plant, and the
building of Kapla, an anode production plant in
Hvalfjörður. It should be noted that the fact that these
projects do have an operational license does not auto-
matically mean that they will be built.
4.3 Projections and aggregateeffects of policies and measures
If emissions are in accord with projections, Iceland will
be able to meet its obligations for the first commitment
period of the Kyoto Protocol, even with the planned
4 PROJECTIONS AND THE TOTAL EFFECT OFMEASURES
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0
Gg C
O2-
eq
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Century AluminumAlcan
Icelandic AlloysCementFossil fuelOther
Kyoto target + 14/CP.7
Kyoto targetAverage
Average + 14/CP.7Alcoa
Average emissions of greenhousegas, 2008–2012
4,519 13% under
Average emissions of greenhousegas not including emissions fallingunder Decision 14/CP.7, 2008-2012
3,294 9% under
Total emissions in 2012 4,481 37% increasefrom the 1990 level
Emissions in 2012, not includingemissions falling under Decision14/CP.7
3,249 1% decreasefrom the 1990 level
Total emissions in 2020: 4,519 38% increase from the 1990 level
Scenario 1 Gg CO2-eq Kyoto target
CHAPTER
expansion in energy-intensive industries in Scenario 2.
The scenarios are calculated excluding estimations on
carbon sequestration by afforestation and revegetation.
In 1996 the Icelandic government announced its decision
to allocate ISK 450 million for a four-year program of
revegetation and tree planting to increase the sequestra-
tion of carbon dioxide in biomass. This program was
implemented in 1997–2000. The stated goal was an
increase of 22,000 tons in carbon sequestration.
Assessment of the results of the program indicates that
the total additional sequestration was 27,000 tons.
Although this four-year program is over, efforts to
increase the annual carbon sequestration rate resulting
from reforestation and revegetation programs will
continue in the future. It is estimated that measures taken
will increase annual carbon sequestration by about 207
Gg annually in the first commitment period 2008–2012.
It should be noted that discussions are under way
about the construction of two additional new aluminum
smelters in Iceland. These smelters do not, as of yet, have
an operational license, and no decision has been taken on
their construction. If it is decided that they shall be built,
it will be necessary for the government to consider addi-
tional measures to ensure that Iceland will meet its Kyoto
commitments. It is estimated that Iceland will actually
meet its target for the first commitment period
2008–2012, even if these smelters are built, but they
could bring Iceland very close to the target, and caution
will have to be employed.
4.4 Methodology and sensitivityanalysis
The greenhouse gas emissions projections are based on
four key estimations: i) The forecast for fossil fuels that
was published in September 2005. As was mentioned
earlier Iceland’s energy situation is quite different than is
the case in most developed countries. Most greenhouse
gas emissions from energy come from mobile sources,
transport on land and fishing vessels; ii) Estimations for
emissions from industry and industrial processes; iii)
Estimations for emissions from agriculture and iv) Esti-
mations for emissions from waste.
The forecast for fossil fuels is based on several key
elements, including: i) Gross domestic product (GDP),
which is based on estimates from the Ministry of Finance
issued in April 2005 as well as estimates from the
Icelandic banks on the same matter. In these estimations
GDP is expected to increase by 2,4% in 2007; ii)
Population growth is based on estimations from
Icelandic Statistics; iii) The Marine Research Institute
provides estimations for future annual allocation of the
total allowable catch within the Icelandic economic zone;
iv) Aluminum projects are expected to increase during
the projected period and will automatically result in
increased use of fossil fuel during the construction phase
as well as after the production begins. This will also result
in increased shipping traffic to and from Iceland; v) The
number of vehicles in Iceland are expected to increase by
1,2% annually over the projected period. As the number
of vehicles increases, the average use of private cars is
expected to go down. In 2004 the average private car was
driven some 12.600 km per year. This number is expect-
ed to have fallen down to 12.200 km per year at the end of
the projected period; vi) The level of transportation of
goods on roads is expected to increase during the project-
ed period; vii) The proportion of diesel cars in the vehicle
fleet is expected to increase from 27% in 2003 to 38% at
the end of the projected period.
There are several key elements included in the project-
ed emissions from industry and industrial processes,
including: i) Emissions from cement production are esti-
mated to be the same during the projected period as the
average emissions during the five previous years; ii)
Emissions from the Icelandic Alloys ferrosilicon plant in
Hvalfjörður are estimated to be the same per produced
35
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
01990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Gg C
O2-
eq
Kapla
Century AluminumAlcan
Icelandic AlloysCementFossil fuelOther
Kyoto target + 14/CP.7
Kyoto targetAverage
Average + 14/CP.7Alcoa
Average emissions of greenhousegas, 2008–2012
4,959 5% under
Average emissions of greenhousegas not including emissions fallingunder Decision 14/CP.7, 2008–2012
3,360 7% under
Total emissions in 2012 5,236 60% increase from the 1990 level
Emissions in 2012, not includingemissions falling under Decision14/CP.7
3,344 2% increase from the1990 level
Total emissions in 2020: 5,335 63% increase from the 1990 level
Scenario 2 Gg CO2-eq Kyoto target
36
ton during the projected period as the average emission
per produced ton of ferrosilicon during the three previ-
ous years; iii) Emissions of CO2 from the aluminum
plants is the same during the projected period as the
average emission per produced ton of aluminum during
the five previous years; iv) Emissions of PFCs from the
aluminum plants are estimated to be 0.14 tons of CO2
equivalents per produced ton of aluminum. In the case of
the enlargement of the Century Aluminum and Alcan
aluminum plants this number is higher in the year of the
enlargement, or 0.28 tons of CO2 equivalents per
produced ton of aluminum. During the startup phase for
the Alcoa aluminum plant, emissions of PFCs are expect-
ed to be 2.5 tons of CO2 equivalents per produced ton of
aluminum in the first year and then linearly decreasing to
0.14 tons of CO2 equivalents during the next three years.
Emissions from agriculture have been decreasing over
the past few years but are expected to stay the same dur-
ing the projected period as they where in 2004. The same
applies to emissions from waste.
The effects of the key measures included in the govern-
ment climate policy (see Chapter 3) are already integrat-
ed into the projections for both scenarios. Sensitivity
analysis was undertaken to estimate the emissions if three
of the measures did not have the expected effects. The
assumptions were changed as follows: i) Transport: The
fossil fuel forecast expects a 10% reduction in gasoline
use with an equal increase in the use of diesel oil, as a
consequence of a change in taxation. How much would
the emissions increase if the relative share of gasoline and
diesel oil remained unchanged? ii) Industry: The projec-
tions assume that both existing and new aluminum
industries will succeed in limiting PFC emissions at 0.14
tons of CO2 equivalents per each ton of produced
aluminum. The results of the 2003 analysis by the
International Aluminium Institute show that the median
emission level for aluminum smelters is 0.38 tons of CO2
equivalents, and the average number is still higher. The
2003 survey is the sixth in a series of surveys conducted
by the International Aluminium Institute, covering
anode effect data from global aluminum producers over
the period from 1990 through 2003. How much would
the emissions increase if the PFC emissions from the
Icelandic aluminum industry would have been 0,38 tons
of CO2 equivalents? iii) Waste: Collection of landfill gas
for flaring and energy recovery. How much would the
emissions increase if the gas is not collected?
Given these changes in assumptions, annual emissions
for the period 2008–2012 would increase by 200 Gg CO2
equivalent for Scenario 1, bringing the annual average up
to 4,719 Gg CO2 equivalent, which falls within the allo-
cated amount. For Scenario 2 the total annual emissions
would increase by 226 Gg CO2 equivalent, bringing the
annual average up to 5,185 Gg CO2 equivalent, which
also falls within the allocated amount, but would be very
close to exceeding the allocated amount of 5,202 Gg CO2
equivalent for the first commitment period of the Kyoto
Protocol.
37
5.1 Impacts on climateTime series of temperature change in Iceland since the
19th century show a period of rapid warming following
the 1920s. Similar warming is observed in global aver-
ages, but in Iceland the temperature change was greater
and more abrupt. From the 1950s temperatures in
Iceland had a downward trend with a minimum reached
during the Great Salinity Anomaly, when sea ice was
prevalent during late winter along the north coast. There
is another cold period in the late 1970’s with 1979 being
the coldest year of the 20th century in Iceland. Since the
1980’s, Iceland has experienced considerable warming,
and early in the 21st century temperatures reached values
comparable to those observed in the 1930s. Both in
Reykjavík and Stykkishólmur the three warmest years in
the instrumental record are currently 1939, 1941 and
2003, with only small differences between these years.
Comparison of the spatial pattern of the warming in
the 1920s and 1930s with temperature changes in the last
20 years shows systematic differences. Recent warming
has spatial characteristics that show that in the last
decades of the 20th century, all of the country warmed,
but the warming was greatest in the north-eastern part.
The warming had a so called SW– NE character to it. The
rapid warming in the early part of the 20th century is
clearly greater compared with more recent warming and
it is greater along most of the north shore than along the
south shore. This warming thus had a N–S character to it.
The N–S pattern may be due to the climatic influences of
sea ice. The SW–NE pattern may on the other hand be
linked to the fact that air temperature in Iceland is greatly
influenced by advection of warmer air from the south.
The different warming patterns can be linked to differ-
ences in the large scale ocean and air circulation
patterns.
The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) was
presented at the Fourth Arctic Council Ministerial
Meeting in Reykjavik in November 2004. It reports on the
evaluation of Arctic climate change and its impacts for the
region and for the world. Observations indicate that the
climate of the Arctic is changing markedly. For example,
air temperatures are generally higher, the extent and
duration of snow and sea ice are diminishing, permafrost
is thawing and precipitation has increased. Owing to
natural variations and the
complex interactions of
the climate system, the
observed trends show
variations within each
region. Although some
regions have cooled slight-
ly, the overall trend for the
Arctic is a substantial
warming over the last few
decades.
5.2 Impacts on oceanic currentsThe climate of Europe and the North Atlantic is much
milder than it is at comparable latitudes in Asia, Canada
and Alaska. This is due to the heat transport from the
south with air and water masses. A key process in this
respect is the so called thermohaline circulation in the
ocean. It is based on the sinking of seawater, mainly due
to cooling and ice formation, at certain positions at high
latitudes. After sinking this water is called deep water and
it subsequently flows to lower latitudes. In the North
5 IMPACTS AND ADAPTATION MEASURES
Mean annual temperature at Stykkishólmur 1820-2004
°C
5
4
3
2
11850 1900 1950 2000
CHAPTER
Atlantic huge amounts of deep water is formed, e.g. in
the Arctic Ocean, the Greenland Sea, the Iceland Sea and
the Labrador Sea. The deep water that is formed north of
the Greenland-Scotland Ridge flows over the ridge on
both sides of Iceland and also through the Faroe-
Shetland Channel.
Many numerical models predict that the production of
deep water will be reduced as a result of increasing green-
house gas emissions. This happens when more fresh
water is introduced to the Nordic Seas because of melting
of glaciers and thawing of permafrost that will make the
surface layer fresher and therefore reduce the likelihood
of convection. This in turn would lead to reduced deep
water flow over the Greenland-Scotland ridge and a
compensating reduction of flow of warm currents into
the Nordic Seas thus inducing a cooling in the area. Ice
core data from the Greenland Ice Sheet seem to indicate
that this can happen rather quickly or within decades.
Research projects measuring changes in the deep water
fluxes over the ridges have succeeded in obtaining a time
series of the flux of Atlantic water as well as of the deep
water. With the time series available now it is however
not possible to conclude that the flow of deep water is
decreasing.
5.3 Impacts on marine ecosystemsand fish stocks
To project the effects of climate change on marine
ecosystems is a challenging task. Available evidence
suggests that, as a general rule, primary and secondary
production and thereby the carrying capacity of the
Icelandic marine ecosystem is enhanced in warm
periods, while lower temperatures have the reverse effect.
Within limits, this is a reasonable assumption since the
northern and eastern parts of the Icelandic marine
ecosystem border the Polar Front. In cold years the Polar
Front can be located close to the coast. During warm
periods it occurs far offshore, when levels of biological
production are enhanced
through nutrient renewal
and associated mixing
processes, resulting from an
increased flow of Atlantic
water onto the north and
east Icelandic plateau.
Over the last few years the
salinity and temperature
levels of Atlantic water
south and west off Iceland
have increased. At the same
time, there have been indi-
cations of increased flow of Atlantic water onto the
mixed water areas over the shelf north and east of Iceland
in spring and, in particular, in late summer and autumn.
This may be the start of a period of increased presence of
Atlantic water, resulting in higher temperatures and
increased vertical mixing over the north Icelandic
plateau. The time series is still too short though to enable
firm conclusions. However, there are many other
parameters which can affect how an ecosystem and its
components, especially those at the upper trophic levels,
will react to changes in temperature, salinity, and levels of
primary and secondary production. Two of the most
important are stock sizes and fisheries, which are them-
selves connected.
It is unlikely that the response of commercial fish
stocks to a warming of the marine environment around
Iceland, similar to that of the 1920s and 1930s, will be the
same in scope, magnitude, and speed as occurred then,
mainly because most spawning fish are now fewer,
younger and smaller than at that time. Nevertheless, a
moderate warming is likely to improve survival of larvae
and juveniles of most species and thereby contribute to
increased abundance of commercial stocks in general.
The magnitude of these changes will, however, be no less
dependent on the success of future fishing policies in
enlarging stock sizes in general and spawning stock
biomasses in particular, since the carrying capacity of
Icelandic waters is probably about two to three times
greater than that needed by the biomass of commercial
species in the area at present.
5.4 Impacts on glaciersGlaciers are a distinctive feature of Iceland, covering
about 11% of the total land area. The largest glacier is
Vatnajökull in southeast Iceland with an area of 8,200
km2. Climate changes are likely to have a substantial
effect on glaciers and lead to major runoff changes in
Iceland. Changes in glacier runoff are one of the most
38
Retreat of four selected outlet glaciers, 1930–2004
met
ers
500
1930
0
-500
-1.000
-1.500
-2.000
-2.500
-3.000
-3.5001940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Sólheimajökull BreiðamerkurjökullSíðujökullMúlajökull
important consequences of future climate changes in
Iceland. The expected runoff increase may, for example,
have practical implications for the design and operation
of hydroelectric power plants.
Rapid retreat of glaciers does not only influence glacier
runoff but could include implications such as changes in
fluvial erosion from currently glaciated areas, changes in
the courses of glacier rivers, which may affect roads and
other communication lines, and changes that affect trav-
elers in highland areas and the tourist industry. In addi-
tion, glacier changes are of international interest due to
the contribution of glaciers and small ice caps to rising
sea level. Regular monitoring shows that today, all non-
surging glaciers in Iceland are receding.
Many glaciers and ice caps in Iceland are projected to
essentially disappear over the next 100–200 years. In two
resent Nordic research projects, a dynamical ice flow
model coupled to a degree-day mass balance model was
applied to the Hofsjökull ice cap and the southern part of
the Vatnajökull ice cap in Iceland. Future climate change
is assumed to result in more warming during winter than
summer. Runoff from these glaciers is projected to
increase by about 30% with respect to present runoff by
2030. Both glaciers will according to the model computa-
tions have almost disappeared within 200 years from
now.
Although glaciers and ice caps in Iceland constitute
only a small part of the total volume of ice stored in
glaciers and small ice caps globally, studies of their sensi-
tivity to climate changes have a general significance
because these glaciers are among the best monitored
glaciers in the world. Field data from glaciated regions in
the world are scarce due to their remote locations and
difficult and expensive logistics associated with glaciolog-
ical field work. Results of monitoring and research of
Icelandic glaciers are therefore valuable within the global
context, in addition to their importance for evaluating
local hydrological consequences of changes in glaciated
areas in Iceland.
5.5 Impacts on forests, landmanagement and agriculture
Climatic factors, such as temperature, precipitation and
wind, greatly influence plants and vegetation cover, and
therefore have an impact on agriculture. Research on
climatic fluctuation in the past has shown that the grass-
land production increased 11% for each rise in tempera-
ture of 1°C. The impact of a temperature increase will be
even greater on barley production. Negative impacts of
climate change on terrestrial ecosystems include increas-
ing risks of plant diseases. Climate changes will make the
cultivation of many areas more feasible and new species
like barley previously difficult to grow more profitable.
This might cause a shift in utilization of cultivated land
and/or increase pressure on cultivating new areas.
An analysis of the possible impact of climate change on
agriculture, forestry and land use has been made, using a
scenario derived from a Nordic study on climate change
in the North Atlantic region, assuming that in the year
2050 the mean temperature has increased by 1.5°C in the
summertime and 3.0°C over wintertime, and that
precipitation has increased 7.5% in summer and 15% in
winter. The following paragraphs describe changes that
could occur, given these assumptions.
The production of hey could increase significantly,
up to 64%. This would partly be due to greater concen-
tration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but
mostly to higher temperatures and less damage by frost
on grasses. The effects of climate change would be
greatest on cereals. Iceland has a short history of
growing barley since weather conditions limit the
possibility of such production. However, new varia-
tions of barley have made it possible to experiment
with this kind of agriculture. The harvest of barley
could increase by 1.5 tons per hectare up to 2050. An
increase of average summer temperatures by 1.5°C
could open up the possibility of growing oats and
wheat in Iceland, even rye.
Increased precipitation and cloud coverage would lead
to less light in greenhouses, so cost of lighting would
increase. Harvest of potatoes, turnips, carrots and other
vegetables grown outdoors in Iceland today, would
increase, and several new species could be grown. Pests
and plant diseases would become a bigger problem than
currently, and the use of pesticides would increase. This
could hurt the image of Icelandic produce as unpolluted
high-quality foodstuffs.
Impacts of climate change on animal husbandry would
mostly be positive. In addition to increased production
of crops for fodder, the time available for grazing would
increase and the need for sheltering livestock would
decrease.
Increase in summer temperatures will undoubtedly
increase growth rates and coverage of forests in Iceland.
New pests could emerge and cause damage to trees. An
increase in winter temperatures could also do more
damage than good. Wild grazing plants should benefit
from higher summer temperatures and increased precip-
itation. The latter could, however, lead to increased water
erosion of soils. Milder winters could lead to increase in
winter grazing, which is more damaging to vegetation
than summer grazing.
39
5.6 Impacts on terrestrialecosystems
Effect of warmer climate on terrestrial ecosystems in
Iceland are not expected to differ in general from changes
in other parts of the arctic and sub-arctic areas as
described e.g. in ACIA 2005 report. Iceland’s terrestrial
ecosystems can be roughly divided to four main cate-
gories; grasslands, wetlands, woodlands and barren or
sparsely vegetated areas. With warmer climate growing
season is likely to be extended and start earlier in the
spring, although precipitation patterns might halt
growth in early spring. Higher winter temperature is also
likely to stimulate decomposition of litter and soil
organic matter and mineralization of nutrients with
more available for plant growth. These changes will have
effects on function, structure and distribution of terres-
trial ecosystems.
Firstly, many areas in Iceland have suffered from
extensive soil erosion due to, among other factors, heavy
grazing and periods of cold climate. The grazing pressure
on many areas has decreased and one effect of warmer
climate is to enhance reestablishment of former vegeta-
tion and productivity of many of these areas. (Again
depending on precipitation pattern). Vegetation on
sparsely vegetated or barren areas should also benefit
from warmer climate. As a result of more vigorous
growth in most areas a shift in land cover is likely to occur
with sparsely vegetated areas turned to grassland and
grassland turned to woodland. These changes in land
cover will affect distribution and diversity of both flora
and fauna, and some species might become endangered.
Secondly, warmer winters will in general increase
decomposition of organic matter in terrestrial ecosys-
tems both litter and soil organic matter. This increased
decomposition will affect the greenhouse gas budget of
these areas and presumably shift at least temporally the
annual budget towards more release of all GHG (CO2,
CH4 and N2O). Some of this efflux might be counteracted
by increased photosynthesis due to longer growing
season and increased nutrient availability.
Thirdly, changes in proportional size of and turnover
rates of C-storages within terrestrial ecosystems are likely
to occur due to increased respiration, nutrient availabili-
ty and longer growing season.
Fourthly, in Iceland there are discontinuous
permafrost areas which might disappear and the habitats
for plants and as breeding ground for birds disappear as
well. Thawing up of soils makes soil organic matter now
practically unavailable to decomposition become avail-
able.
5.7 Impacts on societyIt is uncertain what impacts climate change will have on
society in Iceland. Any impacts on the fishing industry
though, are likely to have some impacts on the society
especially in some of the smaller communities in
Iceland. From an economic point of view, climate change
may impact the fishing industry in at least two ways. First
by altering the availability of fish stocks and by changing
the market price of fish products. Although both may be
initiated by climate change, the issue of fish stock avail-
ability is a more direct consequence of climate change.
The possible impact of climate change on fish stock avail-
ability may occur through changes in the size of
commercial fish stocks, changes in their geographical
distribution, and changes in their catchability. These
changes, if they occur, will affect the availability of fish
stocks for commercial harvesting. The impact is however
uncertain. It may be negative, and so reduce the
maximum sustainable economic yield from the fish
stocks, or positive, and so increase the maximum
sustainable economic yield from the fish stocks. Also, the
impact may vary between fish stocks and regions.
Irrespectively, it is very likely that climate change will, at
least temporarily, cause instability or fluctuations in
harvesting possibilities while ecosystems adjusts to new
conditions. The adjustment period may be long, and may
even continue after the period of climate change has
ended. The same applies to changes in economic value.
If the change in the fishing industry is gradual and the
economic impacts relatively small it is unlikely that the
accompanying social and political impacts will be
noticeable at a national level. In the long run, social and
political impacts will undoubtedly occur, but whether
these will be large enough to be distinguished from the
impact of other changes is uncertain. Regionally,
however, the situation may be very different. In some
parts of Iceland the economic and social role of the
fishing industry is far above the national average. In these
areas, the economic, social, and political impact of an
expansion or contraction in the fishing industry will be
much greater than for Iceland as a whole and in some
areas undoubtedly quite dramatic.
The main conclusion to be drawn is that the changes in
fish stock availability that seem most likely to be induced
by climate change over the next 50 to 100 years are
unlikely to have a significant long-term impact on GDP
in Iceland and, consequently, on social and political
conditions in Iceland. Also, it appears that any impact,
small as it may be, is more likely to be positive than nega-
tive. If on the other hand, climate change results in
40
41
sudden rather than gradual changes in fish stock avail-
ability, the short-term impact on GDP and economic
growth rates may be quite significant. Over the long
term, the impact on GDP of a sudden change in fish
stocks will be indistinguishable from the effects of more
gradual changes.
The impact that climate change could have on human
health is likely to be less in Iceland than in many other
countries. Direct and indirect impacts on human health
in Iceland are possible in relationship to changes in the
frequency or intensity of natural disasters or extreme
weather events. In small remote locations this is further
accentuated by a challenged capacity to respond to these
events because of the isolated nature of communities.
The variability of such events is not however expected to
increase with climate changes in the future. Changes in
temperature have the potential to influence health in
both negative and positive ways. Considering the low
mean annual temperature in Iceland, the likelihood of
heat events having large impacts on public health is low.
Fewer colder days associated with winter warming may
in fact have several positive health impacts.
Climate change is likely to have profound effects on
biota which can in turn, affect human health in northern
communities and elsewhere in the world. Infectious
diseases of plants, animals and humans are also affected
by climatic changes. Due to the indirect nature of these
influences, predictions of their likelihood are not possi-
ble; however. The potential impacts on human health
related to these changes clearly warrant further research
and monitoring attention.
The potential effects of climate change include in-
creased magnitude and variability in precipitation, and
increased melting of glaciers. These changes may
temporarily increase the potential for hydropower
production in the country. They may also increase the
frequency and severity of river and coastal flooding and
erosion.
5.8 Adaptation measuresMost climate change measures adopted in Iceland aim at
curbing emissions of greenhouse gases, and emphasis on
adaptation measures has been minimal. The IPCC
predicts that the rise in sea level will be 21 cm during the
period 1990–2050 (3.5 mm per year), and 29 cm from
2050 to 2100 (5.8 mm per year). The most important
adaptation measures are likely to involve changes in the
design and/or operation of hydropower stations, dams,
harbours, bridges and other structures that are affected
by changes in the flow of rivers and a rise in sea level.
Expected sea level rise has already been taken into
account in the design of new harbours in Iceland.
42
6.1 Official Development AssistanceDevelopment co-operation is an important aspect of
Icelandic foreign policy. Increased participation in this
area represents Iceland’s fulfillment of its political and
moral obligations as a responsible member of the inter-
national community.
The coming years will see a significant increase in offi-
cial allocations to development co-operation. The
Government of Iceland decided in April 2004 that official
development assistance (ODA) as a proportion of Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) should rise from 0.19% in
2004 to 0.35% in 2009. When this target is achieved,
Iceland’s contributions to development co-operation
will have increased from 0.09% to 0.35% of GDP in ten
years, which represents a fourfold increase. This under-
lines the intent of the Government of Iceland to
contribute to the achievement of the UN Millennium
Development Goals and to shoulder the responsibilities
laid down in the Monterrey Consensus.
6.2 The four pillars of Icelandicdevelopment co-operation
The Government of Iceland supports the Millennium
Declaration of the United Nations, and Iceland’s devel-
opment co-operation will be conducted in the spirit of
the summit declarations on sustainable development,
financing for development and the UN Millennium
Development Goals.
Development is a complex issue which needs to be
addressed simultaneously on numerous fronts. Owing to
its small size, Iceland cannot participate actively in all the
tasks which are relevant to international development
work. Nevertheless, it is important for Iceland’s develop-
ment policy to be based on a comprehensive vision, and
for this reason Iceland’s development co-operation in
the coming years will rest on four principal pillars. They
are:
Human and Economic Development, and Equality
Democracy, Human Rights and Good Governance
Peace, Security and Development
Sustainable Development
Iceland’s development co-operation will focus on reduc-
ing poverty and on the promotion of the Millennium
Development Goals. Over 70% of the assistance provid-
ed by the Icelandic International Development Agency
(ICEIDA) has gone to countries which rank among the
poorest developing countries in the world, and support
for the International Development Agency (IDA), which
directs its efforts principally at assisting this group of
countries, has been at the core of Iceland’s multilateral
development activities. Iceland will continue to channel
the largest share of its development assistance to the
poorest countries.
Through international co-operation, and ratification
of international agreements, the Government of Iceland
has committed itself to contribute to the sustainable util-
isation of natural resources. From the outset, this field
6 FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND TECHNOLOGYTRANSFER
USD
mill
ion
25
20
15
10
5
0
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2003
2002
2004
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
ODA
/GN
I, %
ODA/GNIAmounts
CHAPTER
has figured prominently in Icelandic development co-
operation. For a long time, ICEIDA ’s activities were
almost exclusively limited to the fisheries sector, i.e. fish-
eries research, training and, most recently, guidance in
quality control for fish products and assistance in the
development of the foundations of fisheries control.
Fisheries will continue to be among the principal points
of focus of ICEIDA, but they will be supplemented, as
part of the increased emphasis on sustainable develop-
ment, by energy development, focusing in particular on
renewable energy resources.
In addition to ICEIDA ’s bilateral co-operation, the
Government of Iceland has supported the developing
countries in the area of sustainable utilisation of natural
resources through its administration of the UN
University Geothermal Training Programme and the
UN University Fisheries Training Programme. For over
25 years the Geothermal Training Programme has been
building up expertise in the utilisation of geothermal
energy, and since 1997 the Fisheries Training
Programme has contributed to the promotion of knowl-
edge in fisheries. Increased emphasis will be placed on the
activities of the two training programmes through meas-
ures which include enabling them to admit a greater
number of students.
In addition to strengthening the current Icelandic
development co-operation as regards sustainable devel-
opment, with a special focus on fisheries and geothermal
energy, collaboration with international organisations in
the same areas will also be increased. Special emphasis
will be placed on co-operation with small island develop-
ing states (SIDS), where the development of fisheries and
energy are important economic factors.
Some of the actions listed in the Icelandic development
co-operation strategy, that are especially relevant for the
purposes of mitigating and adapting to climate change
are:
• Increase its focus on sustainable development,
emphasising the sustainable utilisation of natural
resources.
• Strengthen the United Nations University Fisheries
Training Programme and Geothermal Training
Programme by enabling the programmes to admit
more students and set up training courses in devel-
oping countries.
• Make energy a point of focus in ICEIDA ́ s bilateral
development co-operation.
• Strengthen collaboration with international institu-
tions, including FAO and the World Bank, in the
field of fisheries and renewable energy.
• Increase the emphasis on development cooperation
with small island developing states.
• Continue to pursue the policy that Icelandic devel-
opment assistance is primarily intended for the
poorest developing countries in the world.
6.3 Implementation of Iceland’sdevelopment co-operation
The Ministry for Foreign Affairs is responsible for
overall coordination of Iceland’s official development
co-operation. The implementation of Iceland’s devel-
opment co-operation is conducted for the most part
under the auspices of the Ministry, which is responsible
for multilateral development co-operation and peace
building operations, and under the auspices of
ICEIDA, which is responsible for bilateral development
co-operation. Also, Icelandic non-governmental
organisations involved in development co-operation
are steadily growing in strength and increasingly
participating in development co-operation projects. In
addition, the Icelandic private sector has increasingly
been turning the attention to the issues of the develop-
ing countries.
Multilateral Development Co-operationIceland’s participation in international development co-
operation has a threefold objective. In the first place, the
objective is to seek the best and most efficient ways of
providing assistance to developing countries. Bilateral
aid provided by ICEIDA is in some cases the appropriate
channel, but in other cases multilateral co-operation
may be more suitable. In the second place, active partici-
pation in multi-governmental co-operation provides
opportunities to exert international influence.
International co-operation is important to all countries,
particularly to smaller countries, since international
organisations provide a platform for all countries – big
and small, rich and poor – to work toward their common
goals on an even footing. Increased globalisation has
created a still greater need for strong international co-
operation and for this reason the Government of Iceland
will place great emphasis in the future on active partici-
pation in co-operation of this kind. In the third place,
participation in multilateral co-operation is important
for the creation of knowledge and the strengthening of
Icelandic public administration. In the opinion of the
Government, it is important for its development co-
operation to be based on professional and sound
working methods, taking into account the experience
and expertise of other countries and international organ-
isations.
43
In light of the three-part objectives of Icelandic multi-
lateral development work, the principal emphasis will be
placed on participation in the work of the World Bank
and its agencies and the principal agencies of the United
Nations. Iceland’s permanent missions to international
organisations play a significant role in Iceland’s develop-
ment co-operation. These missions include the
Permanent Mission to the Agencies of the United
Nations in New York, Geneva, Paris and Rome, the
World Trade Organisation in Geneva, the Organization
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
and the Organization on Security and Co-operation in
Europe in Vienna.
Bilateral Development Co-operationThis support is based on bilateral development co-opera-
tion agreements between the Government of Iceland and
the governments of partner countries. With ICEIDA’s
increasing scale of activities in recent years, its projects
have become more varied and the Agency currently
works in the social, education and health sectors, in addi-
tion to its fisheries projects. ICEIDA will continue to
focus on these fields, but has now included the energy
sector on its agenda. Thus, the Agency is planning to
work in five fields in its partner countries over the
coming years.
In order to achieve the maximum possible effective-
ness of its development assistance, ICEIDA will continue
to concentrate on few partner countries where the need
for support is acute. Co-operation with countries other
than the current partners, including countries outside
Africa, will be implemented in conjunction with the
expansion of ICEIDA’s scope of activities. The Agency
will also explore possibilities of participating in delimited
and temporary projects outside the formal partner coun-
tries, particularly in fields where Icelandic expertise is
most extensive, e.g. in the fisheries or energy sector.
United Nations University in IcelandOne of Iceland’s largest undertakings in multilateral
development co-operation is the operation of the UN
University Geothermal Training Programme and the
UN University Fisheries Training Programme. The
training programmes provide experts from the develop-
ing countries with an opportunity to engage in
specialised studies in geothermal energy matters and
fisheries in Iceland. The Government of Iceland funds
approximately 85% of the activities of the training
programmes in Iceland. The policy of the Government is
to reinforce both programmes in order to enable them to
accept a greater number of students.
Non-governmental OrganisationsNon-governmental organisations are important partici-
pants in development co-operation and represent a valu-
able input, both through their own conduct of develop-
ment projects and through their public discussion of
issues related to developing countries and development
co-operation. In recent years, the number of NGOs
participating in this field has grown in Iceland, and many
of them are engaged in extensive activities. Among the
strengths of NGOs are their active grassroot work and
strong funding campaigns. In addition, many of them are
conducting their work in the developing countries, e.g.
through affiliation with international NGOs or through
co-operation with local NGOs.
It is important that all NGOs should be able to apply
for government support on an equal footing and any
such cooperation must be subject to allocation rules and
criteria to be met by the organisations. With this in mind,
the government will formulate a policy and develop
comprehensive rules governing co-operation with
NGOs. In its co-operation with NGOs, ICEIDA will also
emphasise contract-based and clearly defined projects
which are carefully prepared and regularly reviewed.
The Private SectorPrivate sector development and increased investment in
developing countries are the key to increased economic
growth and thereby the possibility of reducing poverty.
Since the Icelandic private sector is currently in a phase of
significant cross-border expansion and Icelandic enter-
prises have increasingly had their eyes on potential busi-
ness opportunities in the developing countries, the
Government is interested in supporting this aspect of
their expansion. The Government is interested in facili-
tating relations and co-operation between enterprises in
partner countries and similar undertakings in Iceland. In
order for any such support to take place, both partners
have to perceive an advantage in the partnership.
There are various ways available to reinforce the
private sector in the developing countries through devel-
opment co-operation between public and private enti-
ties. The Government of Iceland will examine in closer
detail any potential opportunities in this area, e.g.
through consultation with representatives of the business
community, NGOs and universities. At the same time,
the Government will explore avenues of mobilising the
Icelandic business community in co-operation with
international organisations.
44
45
Bilateral Assistance 5,407 7,073 14,676Icelandic International Development Agency 3,797 4,813 6,958
of which: Malawi 1,027 1,573 2,238Mozambique 1,168 1,071 1,177Namibia 1,055 1,182 1,264Uganda 477 1,145Other 545 510 1,135
Post-Conflict Peacebuilding Operations 1,610 2,260 7,718of which: ICRU (Kosovo, Sri Lanka, Afganistan) 1,402 2,248 6,129
Bosnia Herzegovina 208 12 48Iraq 1,540
Multilateral Assistance 3,309 3,980 4,437United nations 496 657 834
of which: FAO 93 125 63UNDP 233 245 260UNICEF 121 127 134UNIFEM 32 34 36UNRWA 8 32 47UNESCO 34UNFPA 12 14UNHCR 66 58WFP 5 11 58UNVFVT 5 5WHO 112ILO 20
The World Bank Group 1,211 1,211 2,273of which: IDA 1,211 1,040 2,068
Icelandic Trust Fund 172 205Nordic Development Fund 450 613 668HIPC Trust Fund 865 1,244 428International Monetary Fund 281 240Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund 10 13The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria 214International Fund for Agriculture Development 6 5 7
Other 1,447 2,824 3,175UNU Geothermal Training Programme 640 689 960UNU Fisheries Training Programme 387 535 767Refugee Assistance 216 301Contibutions to NGO´s 75 155 284
of which: ABC Children´s Aid 20 43 56International Red Cross 51 51Save the Children 33 7Icelandic Red Cross 27 214Icelandic Church Aid 22 7
Emergency Assistance 41 684 93Administration 89 460 572Nordic-Baltic Coordination, World Bank 499
Total ODA 10,162 13,877 22,288ODA/GNI (%) 0.12 0.16 0.19
Thous. US$ 2000 2002 2004
Iceland´s Official Development Assistance (ODA)
46
7.1 General research policyEmphasis on research and development (R&D) has
grown in Iceland in recent years. Funds allocated to
research and development were 1% of GDP in 1990 but
had reached around 3% of GDP in the year 2003, making
Iceland fourth among OECD countries in R&D spending
per GDP. This development is mainly due to increased
investment in research by the private sector, but the
public sector has also increased its expenditure on
research. Total spending on R&D in Iceland in 2003 was
23.7 billion Icelandic krónur, while government R&D
spending in 2005 was 9.2 billion krónur.
New legislation on the organization of science and
technology policy and the funding of research and tech-
nological development in Iceland, went into force in
January 2003. A Science and Technology Policy Council
was established, with the task of formulating public
policy on scientific research and technological develop-
ment. The Council is headed by the Prime Minister, and
consists of ministers, scientists and business representa-
tives.
Environmental change is recognized as an important
area in R&D. In 1998 the Icelandic Research Council
launched a five-year program with a special fund to
support projects in environmental research and research
on information technology, which concluded in 2004.
Several climate-related projects received grants from this
fund. Such projects also get support from other funds of
the Icelandic Research Council, but Icelandic scientists
are also involved in a number of international climate-
related projects funded from sources, such as the
European Union and the Nordic Council of Ministers.
Research on climate and systematic observation is also
part of the mandate of some public institutions, such as
the Icelandic Meteorological Office (IMO) and the
Marine Research Institute (MRI).
Efforts are under way to coordinate climate-related
research better, and to possibly enhance it. The Icelandic
Research Council has held three workshops on enhanc-
ing research related to the Arctic, including climate
change research. The Science and Technology Policy
Council has asked the Ministry for the Environment to
draft a report by spring 2006 on the state of climate-
related research, priorities and suggestions for improve-
ments.
7.2 Climatic researchMost of the climate-related research in Iceland is
focused on climate processes and climate system studies
and impacts of climate change. Other efforts involve
modeling and prediction, and large ongoing projects deal
with mitigation measures, but there has been less
research on socio-economic analysis.
7.2.1 Climate process and climate system studiesThe evaluation of changes and variability of the climate
(including sea-ice) is among the basic tasks of the IMO.
Although the research is mainly centered on the climate
of Iceland, the IMO has also been active in many multi-
national projects focusing on the analysis of climate data.
The mean temperature of the period 1961 to 1990 has
been mapped, and the data used is accessible in an on-
line data bank, which is useful for research on variability
in weather and climate. Methodological work on the
mapping of precipitation in Iceland is under way, a part
of this work is connected to research on glaciers and
change in their extent and thickness. A research project
presenting a comprehensive review of temperature and
precipitation in Iceland for the last 100–150 years was
presented in the International Journal of Climatology in
2004. An ongoing research project is looking at long term
cycles in variability of several weather features, inter alia
in relation to the North Atlantic Oscillation. A multina-
tional research project on air pressure from 1851, which
uses data from Iceland, has finished, resulting in a scien-
tific paper due to be published in the Journal of Climate.
Icelandic scientists have for many years contributed
considerably to paleoclimatological work with their
7 RESEARCH AND SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION
CHAPTER
participation in many ice and sediment core projects.
Most of this work has taken place within the University of
Iceland. Some examples of research topics within that
field and in related fields at the University include:
• A review of the size of Icelandic glaciers for the last
300 years and an estimate of their contribution to
higher sea levels,
• Analysis of seafloor sediment cores from the coastal
shelf north of Iceland to reconstruct changes in
sedimentation, biota and ocean currents,
• Analysis of Tertiary and Quaternary oceanic paleo-
fauna in order to chart changes in the system of
ocean currents in that period,
• Reconstruction of climate change around the North
Atlantic in the last 13,000 years by analysis of sedi-
mentation (carbon content, pollen etc.) in lakes and
fjords,
7.2.2 Modeling and prediction The climate modeling work of the IMO has mostly been
restricted to physical downscaling experiments and to
the effects of mountains on both local climate and the
general circulation in the North Atlantic Region. The
IMO takes part in the European High- Resolution-
Limited-Area-Model (HIRLAM) cooperation and its
development and evolution of high-resolution deter-
ministic weather forecasting models, but the model is not
in operational use in Iceland. The IMO, in cooperation
with the University of Iceland, uses the non-hydrostatic,
high-resolution 5th generation Mesoscale Model (MM5)
for research projects in dynamic meteorology and for the
downscaling of climate simulations. Most of the research
projects in dynamic meteorology have emphasized
interaction between the terrain and the atmosphere on
scales ranging from flow around hills up to synoptic
systems. Projects on predictability and sensitivity of fore-
casts to observations are planned in connection to the
upcoming WMO-program THORPEX (The
Observation System Research and Predictability
Experiment). The IMO, the MRI and the University of
Akureyri cooperate on a research project with the goal of
understanding the natural variations in oceanic circula-
tion surrounding Iceland, and how climate change might
affect this. A model describing the mesoscale variability
of the ocean circulation is an important component of
this project.
7.2.3 Impacts of climate change Icelandic research institutions are involved in several
projects studying the impact of future global climate
changes. A key project in this regard was the Arctic
Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA), organized by the
Arctic Council, the results of which were presented at the
ACIA International Scientific Symposium on Climate
Change in the Arctic in Reykjavik, Iceland, 9–12
November 2004. The goal of ACIA is to evaluate and
synthesize knowledge on climate variability, climate
change, increased ultraviolet radiation and their conse-
quences. The aim is also to provide useful and reliable
information to the governments, organizations and
people of the Arctic on policy options to meet such
changes. ACIA examines possible future impacts on the
environment and its living resources, on human health,
and on buildings, roads and other infrastructure. More
than 250 scientists and six circumpolar indigenous
peoples’ organisations participated in the ACIA. The
main results were presented in two documents: a scientif-
ic document, a fully referenced and detailed scientific
assessment report and a Synthesis/overview document, a
popular version of the scientific document aimed at
communicating the science and the traditional knowl-
edge of climate change in the Arctic to the general public.
Icelandic scientists, including from the IMO and the
MRI, participated actively in the drafting of the ACIA.
Climate and Energy (CE) is a new Nordic research
project with funding from the Nordic Energy Research,
and follows up a previous project, entitled Climate,
Water and Energy (CWE). The CE project has the objec-
tive of a comprehensive assessment of the impact of
climate change on Nordic renewable energy resources
including hydropower, wind power, biofuels and solar
energy. This will include assessment of power production
and its sensitivity and vulnerability to climate change on
both temporal and spatial scales; assessment of the
impacts of extremes including floods, droughts, storms,
seasonal pattern and variability. These assessments
should create an objective base for improved decisions
concerning climate change and energy issues within the
Nordic region. In addition to participating in this Nordic
project, the National Energy Authority and others have
also worked on a related research project, Weather and
energy (2004–2007), that focuses specifically on the
impact of weather and climate on hydro energy in
Iceland.
The ITEX-project (International Tundra Experiment)
is an international project that commenced in 1990, and
aims to research the effects of climate change on Arctic
and mountain flora. Two experimental sites were
defined in 1995–1996, where regular observation on
climate factors and flora have taken place. The Icelandic
part of the project is run by the Icelandic Institute of
47
Natural History (IINH), the Agricultural University of
Iceland (AUI) and IMO. SCANNET is an EU-funded
project, consisting of a net of research stations on
drylands around the North Atlantic, intended to enhance
and coordinate research on the impact of climate change
in that area; the IINH is part of the project and monitors
a site in Iceland as part of the network.
Many other projects are run by IINH, AUI and others,
that have the purpose of researching and monitoring the
state of flora and fauna in Iceland and Icelandic waters,
that are not always primarily intended to research
impacts of climate change, but can be used for that
purpose. A project monitoring flora, including mosses
and lichen, at 100 sites on grazing lands in Iceland, can
yield valuable information on the response of flora to
both change in grazing patterns and climate change.
Another project looks at the impact of afforestation proj-
ects on biological diversity, carbon cycles etc. at selected
sites. The IINH has organized counting of birds in winter
in Iceland since 1952, which gives important information
about changes in their numbers and area, which is affect-
ed by climate. The University of Iceland hosts a research
project on the sensitivity of highland tundra to changes
in the environment, including climate. BIOICE, a big
research project on benthal fauna in Icelandic waters, run
by the IINH, the MRI, the University of Iceland and the
township of Sandgerði, has yielded valuable information
since its commencement in 1992 on the distribution of
benthic fauna in Icelandic waters, which can be used to
monitor changes in the future.
The MRI is preparing a research project on the move-
ment of capelin in the waters around and north of
Iceland, and how they are influenced by environmental
change, such as ocean temperature, salinity etc. and the
amount of phytoplankton and zooplankton. This project
is considered of practical importance, given the impor-
tance of capelin in the Icelandic economy, but it would
also be connected to an international research effort
(ESSAS) on north-Atlantic ocean ecosystems, that will be
part of the upcoming International Polar Year.
7.2.4 Socio-economic analysis Academic research on how climate change could affect
socio-economic factors has not been substantial. The
report “Climate Change and its Consequences”, which
was published in October 2000, provides some analysis of
the possible social effects of climate change. In the year
2000, a government-appointed committee produced a
report estimating the economic consequences for Iceland
of participating in the Kyoto Protocol.
7.2.5 Carbon cycle and carbon sequestrationstudiesThe Agricultural University of Iceland, Icelandic Forest
Research (the research branch of the Iceland Forest
Service) and the Soil Conservation Service are involved
in studies focusing on carbon sequestration. They
include projects on developing methods to estimate how
much carbon is being restored with revegetation and
afforestation, and research on carbon cycles in Icelandic
ecosystems. Part of this research was directly funded by
the government in order to estimate the sequestration of
carbon in vegetation and soil in afforestation and revege-
tation projects. The data submitted to the UNFCCC on
carbon sequestration in Iceland is largely based on the
information gathered by this research.
The AUI has also engaged in several research projects
on carbon cycles in natural and semi-natural vegetation
areas. CONGAS was a European cooperation project,
that analysed the role of wetlands in the balance of CH4
and CO2 in the Arctic area, with sample sites from
Greenland in the west to central Siberia in the east. The
results of the project showed inter alia that Icelandic
wetlands emitted considerably less CH4 than in other
sample sites. Euroflux is another European cooperative
project, assessing long-term change in the flow of carbon
dioxide and water in European forests; the results are
available in an international databank (Fluxnet). A three-
year project assessed the CO2 interaction between the
most common vegetation types in Iceland and the
atmosphere, using measurements on the ground and
satellite data. Another project looked at the CH4 and CO2
balance of three types of wetlands: untouched, drained
and reclaimed. One result of this research was to show
that reclaimed wetlands can sequester carbon, while
drained wetlands are big emitters of CO2. An ongoing
three year project run by AUI and funded by the National
Power Company investigates the effects of reservoirs on
GHG fluxes.
Icelandic Forest Research has been involved in a num-
ber of research projects on the effect of afforestation on
the carbon balance, both on the national and interna-
tional level. Such studies started in the mid to late 1990s,
through cooperation between IFR, the present AUI and
foreign universities. At that time, a number of Canadian-
Icelandic, Nordic and European research projects took
place in an experimental forest in southern Iceland.
During 1997–2000, the carbon sequestration potential of
the main tree species used in Iceland was evaluated with
harvest measurements and soil sampling. This work was
a part of a governmental action plan at that time on
48
increased carbon sequestration by afforestation and
revegetation. Research and systematic observation on
carbon stocks in forests and woodlands in Iceland
continues to be carried out by IFR, within the project
“Icelandic forest inventory”. This project has received
direct financial support from the government and parlia-
ment of Iceland since 2001. Researchers involved in this
project are collaborating with colleagues in this field at
the European level (COST-actions) and Nordic level
(SNS research networks). The results of this work to date
suggest that an equivalent of 5% of the total, current
annual GHG emissions from Iceland is annually
sequestered in ‘Kyoto-forests’, i.e. forest sinks established
after 1990.
In 2002–2005 IFR led a large national research project,
ICEWOODS, where carbon sequestration of both above-
ground and belowground was estimated for forest stands
of different age (10–50 years) by harvest measurements
and soil sampling. This work also became a part of a
Nordic Centre of Excellence (NECC; Nordic Centre for
Studies of Ecosystem Exchange and its Interactions with
the Climate System). Currently, there is ongoing research
comparing three different ways to estimate carbon
sequestration in afforestation areas: a) direct measure-
ments by eddy covariance technique, b) modeled carbon
uptake and efflux by simulation models and c) carbon
sequestration estimated by harvest measurements and
soil sampling. In 2003–2006 another project was
launched in southern Iceland, where the effect of forest
management (fertilisation and precommercial thinning)
in young forests on carbon stock and carbon sequestra-
tion was evaluated.
The University of Iceland and the National Energy
Authority, in cooperation with French researchers, have
studied the role of river-suspended material in the global
carbon cycle, which have been published in the journal
Geology. The reaction of Ca derived from silicate weath-
ering with CO2 in the world’s oceans to form carbonate
minerals is a critical step in long-term climate modera-
tion. Ca is delivered to the oceans primarily via rivers,
where it is transported either as dissolved species or
within suspended material. A field study to determine
these fluxes was performed on 4 catchments in north-
eastern Iceland. The results indicate inter alia that chem-
ical weathering in Iceland results in significant sequestra-
tion of carbon from the atmosphere.
While the research discussed in the preceding para-
graphs is mainly on natural carbon cycles, they can have
policy implications. Huge wetland areas in the lowlands
in Iceland were drained with government support in the
decades after WWII. The draining had almost come to a
stop in 1990, but some of the drained wetlands are used
for cultivation or grazing, while others have been aban-
doned by agriculture. A small programme started some
years ago aiming to reclaim drained wetlands. Research
results on the carbon balance of Icelandic wetlands
contributed to a proposal in a draft action plan on
sustainable development, due to be adopted in 2006, to
increase the government’s emphasis on reclaiming
wetlands, citing carbon sequestration benefits in addi-
tion to biological diversity concerns. This new emphasis
on carbon sequestration in reclaimed wetlands will be
part of a general emphasis on the enhancement of carbon
sinks in Icelandic climate mitigation policy, which is one
of the underlying objectives of the current Icelandic
government’s afforestation and revegetation policy.
Carbon sequestration by chemical weathering in Iceland
is a natural phenomenon, but the extensive human-
induced soil erosion in the past could be a factor in the
magnitude of the sequestration. Likewise, hydro projects
could possibly affect the role of river-suspended material
in the carbon balance. The interaction of natural and
human-induced emissions from land and sequestration
of carbon continues to be a focus in climate-related
research.
The MRI is engaging in the EU-funded project
Atlantic Network of Interdisciplinary Moorings And
Time series for Europe (ANIMATE), that aims to
measure the flux of CO2 between the atmosphere and the
ocean, and to develop the use of buoys for real-time
measurement of environmental factors.
7.3 Systematic observation The two institutions most important for the observation
of climate change are the Icelandic Meteorological Office
(IMO) and the Marine Research Institute (MRI). Other
institutions monitor changes in natural systems that are
affected by climate change, notably the Icelandic
Institute of Natural History (IINH), which monitors the
state of flora and fauna in Iceland.
7.3.1 Atmospheric climate observing systems The IMO is responsible for atmospheric climate moni-
toring and observation. The IMO monitors and archives
data from close to 200 stations. These stations are either
manual (synoptic, climatological and precipitation
stations) or automatic. The number of synoptic stations
in operation (45) has been relatively constant over the
last 40 years. The observations are distributed interna-
tionally on the WMO GTS (Global Telecommunication
System). The manual precipitation network has been
steadily expanding and now consists of about 70 stations
49
measuring precipitation daily in addition to the synoptic
stations. The majority of the precipitation stations report
daily to the IMO database. The automation of measure-
ments started in Iceland in 1987, and the number of
automatic stations has been rapidly growing since then.
The IMO now operates about 70 stations and about 35 in
addition to this in cooperation with the National Power
Company, The Energy Authority and the Maritime
Administration. A repository of data from the about 50
stations operated by the Public Roads Administration is
also located at the IMO. A majority of automatic stations
observe wind and temperature every 10 minutes, a few
once per hour, and most transmit data to the central
database every hour. Many stations also include humidi-
ty, pressure and precipitation observations, and a few
observe additional parameters (shortwave radiation and
ground temperatures) or observe at more than one level.
The IMO participates in the Global Atmospheric
Observing Systems (GAOS). The IMO has participated
in the MATCH ozone-sounding program during the
winter months since 1990, and the data are reported to
the International Ozone Data base at NILU, Norway.
The three GAW stations are: the BAPM at Írafoss and
Stórhöfði, where tropospheric ozone, carbon dioxide,
methane and isotopes of oxygen and carbon are moni-
tored in cooperation with NOAA. Heavy metals and
Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in air and precipi-
tation are monitored and reported to AMAP and
OSPAR. In Reykjavik, data on global radiation are
collected and reported annually to the World Radiation
Data Center in St. Petersburg (WRDC).
7.3.2 Ocean climate observing systems Both the IMO and the Marine Research Institute (MRI)
contribute to ocean climate observations. The IMO does
not operate any Icelandic drifting or moored buoys, but
as members of EGOS (European Group on Ocean
Stations), which is an organization operating 50 meteor-
ological drifting buoys and 11 moored buoys in the
North-Atlantic at any time, it supports a very important
meteorological network. The Marine Research Institute
(MRI) is a member of the International Council of
Exploration of the Seas (ICES) and through that
membership contributes to the GOOS (Global Oceanic
Observing System). The MRI maintains a monitoring
net of about 100 hydrobiological stations on 12 standard
sections (transects) around Iceland. These stations are
monitored four times per year for physical and chemical
observations (phosphate, nitrate, silicate) and once a year
for biological observations (phytoplankton, zooplank-
ton). Some of these stations have been monitored since
around 1950. The zooplankton biomass monitoring has
demonstrated fluctuations, which to some extent appear
to be linked to climate and circulation changes. The MRI
has monitored carbon dioxide at selected stations for
about 20 years and maintains a grid of about 10 continu-
ous sea surface temperature meters at coastal stations all
around the country.
The MRI is involved in several monitoring projects of
ocean currents, in cooperation with European and
American scientists. These projects include the
Meridional Overturning Exchange with the Nordic seas
(MOEN), the Arctic-Subarctic Ocean Flux-array for
European climate: West (ASOF-W) and the West-
Nordic Ocean Climate, which all involve the monitoring
of ocean currents strength and other environmental
factors. The University of Akureyri is a partner in some of
these ocean current research.
7.4 Research on mitigation optionsand technology
Several research projects deal with issues related to miti-
gation options and technology. The most important of
these involve renewable energy and alternative fuels,
notably hydrogen, and carbon sequestration by afforesta-
tion, revegetation and wetland reclamation (see above).
Icelandic energy institutions and companies are active
in research on renewable energy exploitation and tech-
nology. One notable research project on geothermal
energy, which could have a potentially great impact on
the exploitation of geothermal in Iceland and worldwide,
is the Iceland Deep Drilling Project (IDDP). The main
purpose of the IDDP project is to find out if it is econom-
ically feasible to extract energy and chemicals out of
hydrothermal systems at supercritical conditions.
An Icelandic energy consortium was established in the
year 2000 around the IDDP. The consortium is
composed of three Icelandic energy companies and the
National Energy Authority of Iceland. The consortium is
preparing the drilling of a 4–5 km deep drill hole into one
of its high-temperature hydrothermal system to reach
400–600°C hot supercritical hydrous fluid at a rifted plate
margin on a mid-ocean ridge. A feasibility report was
completed in May 2003.
ICDP (International Continental Scientific Drilling
Program) granted financial supports to organize the
scientific program. As a result of two workshops on
drilling technology and science IDDP has received
approximately 60 active research proposals from the
international scientific community, which range from
petrology and petrophysics to fluid chemistry, water rock
reactions, surface and borehole geophysics and reservoir
50
modeling. The first IDDP candidate well, RN-17, was
drilled at Reykjanes in SW-Iceland in 2004–2005 down
to 3082 m depth. Preparation is ongoing to deepen this
well, or another candidate well at Reykjanes, down to 4
km depth in autumn 2006. The IDDP is a long term
research and development project which will take at least
a decade to conclude. As yet, IDDP is therefore not an
alternative solution to meet energy demand in the near
or intermediate future. In the longer term, however, the
potential benefits of the IDDP regarding increased use of
climate-friendly geothermal energy include:
• Increased power output per well, perhaps by an
order of magnitude, and production of higher-
value, high-pressure, high-temperature steam,
• Development of an environmentally benign, high-
enthalpy energy source below currently producing
geothermal fields,
• Extended lifetime of the exploited geothermal reser-
voirs and power generation facilities, and
• Re-evaluation of the geothermal resource base.
7.4.1 International hydrogen projectsThe Icelandic government has offered political support
to those interested in developing hydrogen as an energy
carrier in the transport sector, which would greatly
reduce GHG emissions from mobile sources. In 1997 the
Ministry of Industry and Commerce appointed a special
committee to explore available options for use of
domestic renewable energy. Following this committee’s
work the government decided to offer Iceland as an
international platform for hydrogen research and for
that has created a specific policy which has 4 key
elements.
• Favourable framework for business and research
• International cooperation
• Education and training
• Hydrogen research
As part of this policy the government has taken some
large steps in implementing these policy measures. The
government was a founding member of the International
Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy (IPHE) and
Iceland is also active in the European Hydrogen
Platform. The government has also taken direct meas-
ures with the unique step of eliminating all import duties
and VAT on hydrogen vehicles.
Following the work of the committee in 1997 all key
stakeholders established a company called VistOrka to be
the unifier of the Icelandic interest in hydrogen. VistOrka
then joined forces with Daimler Chrysler, Norsk Hydro
and Shell Hydrogen to form Icelandic New Energy which
has been the key actor in creating the future hydrogen
society. Still stakeholders in VistOrka are very active and
currently are working towards establishing a joint
Hydrogen Technological Center, which is to provide
facilities for researchers, students and others which are
currently working on various projects. Iceland is an ideal
testing site for hydrogen projects because of the small size
of society, the availability of renewable energy and the
political commitment of the Icelandic government.
These factors have drawn various different academics to
do work in Iceland.
Icelandic New Energy (INE), in cooperation with its
foreign partners, runs several research projects aiming to
make it technologically possible and economically feasible
to use hydrogen as an energy carrier in the transport
sector and for fishing vessels. The research program of
INE has received enormous international attention. The
very ambitious overall goal of the program is to create the
world’s first hydrogen economy. This would mean that
Iceland would become independent of imported oil since
domestic, renewable energy sources can be used to
produce hydrogen. The research program has several
phases. The first phase is the ECTOS project. The objec-
tive of ECTOS is to implement a demonstration of state-
of-the art hydrogen technology by running part of the
public transport system in the capital with fuel-cell buses.
The only emission from the vehicles is pure water and the
whole energy chain is virtually emission free as the energy
for the hydrogen productions, electrolysing water, will be
almost free of CO2 emissions because geothermal energy
and hydropower will be used. The world’s first hydrogen
station was part of the program and was opened in April
2003, and the 3 fuel cell buses started in commercial use in
October 2003. The partners in the project are extremely
happy with the success, as the team has driven roughly
90.000 km, pumped over 17 tons of hydrogen and surveys
indicate that more than 90% of the public is very positive
towards using hydrogen as the future fuel instead of fossil
fuels. Currently the second phase is being prepared which
would be to introduce hydrogen private vehicles on the
streets of Iceland. Following that the aim is to have an
international demonstration project on marine applica-
tions of the hydrogen technology. The use of hydrogen is
then expected to rise fairly fast in the next decade as the
technology reaches maturity and becomes available on
the market. Although INE is a private venture, the proj-
ects have received funding from public sources, such as
the European Union and the Government of Iceland.
51
52
8.1 General education policyThe educational system in Iceland is administered by the
Ministry of Education, Science and Culture. The
Ministry prepares educational policy, oversees its imple-
mentation, and is responsible for educational matters at
all educational levels. Education has traditionally been
organized within the public sector, and there are very few
private institutions in the school system. Almost all
private schools receive public funding.
The educational system is divided into four levels.
Pre-school is the first educational level and is intended
for children below the compulsory age for education.
Parents are free to decide whether their children attend
preschool. In 2003 there were 267 pre-schools operated
in Iceland. Compulsory Level is the second educational
level. Children and adolescents aged 6-16 must by law
attend 10 years of compulsory education. Upper
Secondary Level is the third educational level. All those
who have completed their compulsory education or
equivalent have the right to study at the upper second-
ary level. This generally incorporates the age group
16–20.
8.2 Environmental educationThe public’s knowledge and understanding of environ-
mental issues in general is a necessary prerequisite for
democratic discussion and decision-making in the field
of environmental protection and management.
Environmental education in schools has increased in
the past decade, from nursery schools to universities.
The University of Iceland now offers a Master’s degree
in environmental studies, and many secondary schools
and professional schools offer courses in the field of
environmental studies, or place a special emphasis on
environmental issues in their curriculum. Studies of
environmental issues in primary schools are included in
many subjects, especially natural sciences but also in
subjects such as life skills and home economics. In addi-
tion many schools have shown initiative in harmonizing
environmental education and general education.
However, it should be noted that environmental educa-
tion is not a part of the curriculum of primary schools as
a separate subject, according to the General Curriculum
from 1999. Therefore environmental education in
schools can be strengthened further and made more
efficient.
The Eco-School Programme is an international
project that Landvernd, an Icelandic environmental
NGO, participates in and oversees its implementation in
Iceland. The preparation for the Eco-School
Programme started in September 2000 when a special
eco-school working group was established. This
working group now acts as the Eco-school steering
committee. It has six members, including representa-
tives for the Ministry for the Environment and the
National Teachers Association. Twelve schools partici-
pated in a pilot programme, which formally started in
2001. Since January 2002 the Programme has been open
to all elementary schools in Iceland, as well as kinder-
gartens that are linked to elementary schools. About 40
elementary schools have entered the programme (out of
200 schools in Iceland), 20 kindergartens and 2 high
schools. Today, 25 schools have received the Green Flag.
The programme is financially supported by the Ministry
for the Environment and the Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture.
Museums play an important role in education.
Museums and exhibitions on natural sciences, culture
and industrial structure have been established around
the country in recent years, promoting increased public
awareness of the relationship between mankind and
nature. Regional Environmental Research Institutes have
also been established in many places around the country
in cooperation between the government and municipal-
ities. These Institutes play a role in education as well as in
research. In 2006 the Icelandic Institute of Natural
History will set up an exhibition focusing on climate
change.
8 EDUCATION, TRAINING AND PUBLICAWARENESS
CHAPTER
8.3 Public access to resources andinformation
General discussion of environmental issues, including
disseminating information to the public through the
media and the Internet, has increased considerably in
recent years. The Ministry for the Environment and the
Environmental and Food Agency have information on
climate change on their websites, including information
about greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland as well as a
general explanation of the causes and consequences of
climate change. The Environmental Education Board,
which has representatives from both the environmental
and education sector, has initiated a website with links to
information in Icelandic about various environmental
issues. The Board has also reached an agreement with the
University of Iceland to include a special section on the
environment on the so-called “Web of Science”. This is a
website where the public can ask questions, and scientists
and researchers at the university provide the answers.
In 2005 a new environmental education website, “My
World” was launched. My World has the aim to aid envi-
ronmental education for students at compulsory level, as
well as making environmental information more accessi-
ble to the general public. My World has three levels, the
first level is for the age group 6–9, the second level is for
the age group 10–12 and the final level is for the age
group 12–15. My World has over 200 pages of text,
pictures and video files on different environmental
topics, including waste, energy, environmental protec-
tion and climate change. My World is a cooperative
project between the Environment and Food Agency and
The National Centre for Educational Materials.
8.4 Involvement of non-govern-mental organizations
Non-governmental organizations play an important role
in disseminating information to the public.
Environmental NGOs run several projects that are
instrumental in raising environmental awareness. One
project especially relevant to climate change is “Global
Action Plan” (GAP). This is an international project that
Landvernd, an Icelandic environmental NGO, partici-
pates in and oversees its implementation in Iceland. GAP
is a project where small groups of 5–8 people follow a
special eight-week program where five subjects are on the
agenda. These subjects are: waste, energy, transport,
shopping and water. Each group has a leader who has
received special training. The goal of the project is to
make people aware of how their actions in daily life influ-
ence the environment, and how simple changes can
make a difference. The Ministry for the Environment
supports the project financially.
53
Iceland’s Report onDemonstrable Progress
Under the Kyoto Protocol
56
Iceland expects to meet its commitments and targets according to the Kyoto Protocol.
Policies and measures undertaken so far to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases are
estimated to have led to 95 Gg less emissions in 2005 than business-as-usual, and to lead
to 200–226 Gg less emissions than business-as-usual in the first commitment period
under the Kyoto Protocol 2008–2012. The most effective measure in curbing GHG
emissions so far is the reduction in emissions of PFCs from aluminum smelters, but
reductions are also expected as a result of measures to encourage the use of small diesel
cars over gasoline cars, and from the collection of methane from the largest landfill in
Iceland. The increase in carbon sequestration by afforestation and revegetation since
1990 will amount to 207 Gg in 2005 and an estimated 207 Gg per year in 2008–2012.
The total effect of measures is therefore estimated at a net reduction of GHG emissions
by 302 Gg in 2005 and 407–433 Gg in 2008–2012. The effect of some other key measures
in reducing emissions from domestic transport and the fishing fleet has not been esti-
mated, because of uncertainties of their potential effect. Despite this, it is hoped that
these measures will actually contribute to reducing emissions in these sectors in the
coming years.
Iceland has been in the process of improving its greenhouse gas inventory. A draft
legislation introduced in 2006 is intended to strengthen the inventory further and serve
as the basis for a national system, in accordance with the demands of Article 5.1 of the
Kyoto Protocol. Iceland has not adopted a national adaptation strategy for climate
change, but the design of new harbours takes into account likely rise in sea level, and
several research projects have analysed the possible impact of climate change on
Icelandic nature, economy and society. Iceland is engaged in the transfer of climate-
friendly technology and know-how, notably with the operation of the UN University
Geothermal Training Programme, which has been strengthened in recent years.
SUMMARY
57
Iceland is a party of the UNFCCC, and ratified the Kyoto
Protocol on May 23, 2002. Iceland’s obligations accord-
ing to the Kyoto Protocol are as follows:
• For the first commitment period, from 2008 to
2012, the greenhouse gas emissions shall not
increase more than 10% from the level of emissions
in 1990.
• For the first commitment period, from 2008 to
2012, the mean annual carbon dioxide emissions
falling under decision 14/CP.7 on the “Impact of
single project on emissions in the commitment
period” shall not exceed 1,600,000 tons.
In 2002 the government adopted a new climate change
policy. The aim of the policy is to curb emissions of
greenhouse gases so that they will not exceed the limits of
Iceland’s obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. A
second objective is to increase the level of carbon seques-
tration resulting from reforestation and revegetation
programs. A review of this policy was started in 2005, and
is due to be concluded in 2006. It is overseen by an inter-
ministerial committee, with members from eight
ministries, headed by the Ministry for the Environment.
The current policy lists a number of measures to be
implemented. The main elements of the policy are:
• Changes in taxation creating incentives to use small
diesel cars.
• Lowering of import fees on no-emission and low-
emission vehicles
• Ensuring that PFC emissions from aluminum
smelters will be minimized.
• Encouragement for the fishing industry to increase
energy efficiency.
• Further reduction of waste disposals, especially in
terms of organic waste.
• Increasing annual carbon sequestration.
• Increased research and development.
• Increased emphasis on information and public
awareness.
These priorities reflect Iceland’s emission profile. As
about 70% of Iceland’s energy, and virtually all stationary
energy production, comes from renewable sources –
hydro and geothermal – there is no room to target this
sector, which is the main target sector for emissions
reduction in many other countries. The emphasis on
control of greenhouse gas emissions must primarily
focus on the three biggest sources: transport, the fishing
fleet and industrial processes.
The first two points deal with the transport sector,
source of 19% of emissions in 1990 and 20% of emissions
in 2003. They both are economic incentives, that aim to
encourage the buying and use of low-emission vehicles
over higher-emission vehicles. Owners of diesel cars paid
a special tax every year, depending on the weight of their
vehicle, with a choice of paying a fixed tax or a mileage
tax. In July 2005, this system was scrapped in favour of a
simple tax on diesel fuel, which was set at a level so that it
would lower the total tax burden for the average owner of
a diesel car. The reduction of import fees on vehicles
using low-pollution engines has been implemented in
two steps, the second one in 2005. Today, low- or no-
emission vehicles, such as electric vehicles or hydrogen-
powered vehicles, are exempted from paying import fees,
which are 45% on most passenger cars. This exemption is
valid until 2008, and can be renewed at that date.
Vehicles with hybrid engine cars and methane-powered
vehicles pay around US$ 3200 less in import fees than
other cars, a rebate valid at least until the end of 2006.
The third point relates to the aluminum industry, an
important and growing economic sector in Iceland.
While the energy used for aluminum production –
normally the biggest source of emissions in the process –
produces low or almost zero emissions in Iceland, there
are emissions of CO2 and PFCs from the industrial
1 ICELAND´S CLIMATE POLICY
CHAPTER
58
process of aluminum smelting. The emissions of carbon
dioxide are a constant factor in the process, and are diffi-
cult to limit. Emissions of PFCs, on the other hand, can
vary much, depending on the process and efforts to limit
so-called anode effects. It is therefore imperative to keep
the emissions of PFCs as low as possible. Great progress
has been achieved in this area through a co-operative
approach between the government and the aluminum
industry. The share of industrial process emissions from
the aluminum industry and other industrial processes in
total GHG emissions in Iceland was 26% in 1990, and
27% in 2003.
The fourth point relates to emissions from the fishing
industry. Iceland is the 12. largest fishing nation in the
world, exporting nearly all its catch. The marine sector is
one of the main economic sectors and the single biggest
export sectors in Iceland. The fishing fleet was responsi-
ble for 20% of emissions in 1990 and 19% in 2003. The
government has supported through its research policy
the development of energy-saving technology for ships,
and has bought energy-saving systems in two govern-
ment-owned ships.
Emissions from waste disposal, essentially of methane
from landfills, was 4% of total GHG emissions in Iceland
in 1990 and 6% in 2003. Methane is collected from the
largest landfill in the country, serving all of the greater
Reykjavík area, since 1997. Currently, about 50 vehicles
are run on methane from the landfill, while the rest is
burned, resulting in less GHG emissions than before. A
new government waste strategy plans for reduced
disposal of waste, especially organic waste, which should
further reduce emissions.
Carbon sequestration is a key element of Iceland’s
climate change strategy. Revegetation and reforestation
have been a high priority in Iceland, as the country has
suffered from a big soil erosion problem for centuries.
There is significant potential to enhance carbon seques-
tration beyond the present level. In 1996 the Icelandic
government announced its decision to allocate ISK 450
allocate million (around US$ 8 million) for a four-year
program of revegetation and tree planting to increase the
sequestration of carbon dioxide. This program was
implemented in 1997–2000.
Some research and development activities aim to
encourage low- or no-emissions technology. Included in
this are experiments with alternative energy that could
replace fossil fuels, as well as research on fuel cells and
hydrogen as energy carrier. Iceland’s hydrogen project
has created significant interest. The development of
hydrogen technology in vehicles is mostly in the hands of
industries outside Iceland, but there are hydrogen-
powered buses running in the Reykjavík area, and
Iceland hopes to have the infrastructure in place to take
advantage of hydrogen as it becomes commercially
viable.
The government supports some projects organized by
environmental NGOs, whose aim is to encourage envi-
ronmentally responsible behavior. Information about
ways consumers can reduce GHG emissions in their
everyday lives is integrated into these projects, dealing
with issues such as minimizing waste, altering travel
habits and increasing fuel efficiency.
Other policies in the climate change strategy have less
impact, but they include: Shortening of travel distances
with the construction of new roads and tunnels;
strengthening of public transport in Iceland; and
increased coordination of traffic lights.
59
Projections for greenhouse gas emissions until 2020 have
recently been produced by the Environment and Food
Agency, in cooperation with the Energy Forecast Com-
mittee, which represents companies, institutions and
organizations involved in the energy sector. The projec-
tions described in this chapter are based on the energy
forecast for fossil fuels that was published in September
2005. Two scenarios are provided in the projections,
depending on the level of increase in new energy-inten-
sive industry in Iceland until 2020.
Scenario 1 assumes no additions to energy-intensive
industries other than those already in progress in
2004/2005, meaning the enlargement of the Century
Aluminum plant and the building of the Fjarðaál
aluminum plant in the eastern part of Iceland.
Scenario 2 is based on the assumption that all energy-
intensive projects which currently have an operational
license will be built, which means four new projects in
addition to the two projects already included in scenario 1:
an enlargement of the Alcan aluminum plant in
Straumsvík, an enlargement of the Icelandic Alloys
ferrosilicon plant in Hvalfjörður, a further enlargement of
the Century Aluminum plant, and the building of an
anode production plant in Hvalfjörður. It should be noted
that the fact that these projects do have an operational
license does not automatically mean that they will be built.
2 TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS OF GREENHOUSEGAS EMISSIONS
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0
Gg C
O2-
eq
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Century AluminumAlcan
Icelandic AlloysCementFossil fuelOther
Kyoto target + 14/CP.7
Kyoto targetAverage
Average + 14/CP.7Alcoa
Average emissions of greenhousegas, 2008–2012
4,519 13% under
Average emissions of greenhousegas not including emissions fallingunder Decision 14/CP.7, 2008-2012
3,294 9% under
Total emissions in 2012 4,481 37% increasefrom the 1990 level
Emissions in 2012, not includingemissions falling under Decision14/CP.7
3,249 1% decreasefrom the 1990 level
Total emissions in 2020: 4,519 38% increase from the 1990 level
Scenario 1 Gg CO2-eq Kyoto target
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
01990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Gg C
O2-
eq
Kapla
Century AluminumAlcan
Icelandic AlloysCementFossil fuelOther
Kyoto target + 14/CP.7
Kyoto targetAverage
Average + 14/CP.7Alcoa
Average emissions of greenhousegas, 2008–2012
4,959 5% under
Average emissions of greenhousegas not including emissions fallingunder Decision 14/CP.7, 2008–2012
3,360 7% under
Total emissions in 2012 5,236 60% increase from the 1990 level
Emissions in 2012, not includingemissions falling under Decision14/CP.7
3,344 2% increase from the1990 level
Total emissions in 2020: 5,335 63% increase from the 1990 level
Scenario 2 Gg CO2-eq Kyoto target
CHAPTER
60
If emissions are in accord with projections, Iceland will
be able to meet its obligations for the first commitment
period of the Kyoto Protocol, even with the planned
expansion in energy-intensive industries in Scenario 2.
The scenarios are calculated excluding estimations on
carbon sequestration by afforestation and revegetation,
which according to predictions will reduce net emissions
approximately 207 Gg annually in 2008–2012.
It should be noted that discussions are under way
about the construction of two additional new aluminum
smelters in Iceland. These smelters do not, as of yet, have
an operational license, and no decision has been taken on
their construction. If it is decided that they shall be built,
it will be necessary for the government to consider addi-
tional measures to ensure that Iceland will meet its Kyoto
commitments. It is estimated that Iceland will actually
meet its target for the first commitment period
2008–2012, even if these smelters are built, but they
could bring Iceland very close to the target, and caution
will have to be employed.
Decoupling greenhouse gas emissionsTotal greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland increased by
8% in the period 1990 to 2003. At the same time
however, the Icelandic economy experienced substantial
growth. Emissions per GDP (gross domestic product)
therefore decreased by 20% in the period 1990 to 2003.
Economic growth has therefore been decoupled from
emissions of greehouse gases.
The population of Iceland increased from 256 thou-
sand to 290 thousand between 1990 and 2003. The total
greenhouse gas emissions in Iceland increased by 8% in
the same period, but since the population grew, per
capita emissions fell from 12.8 to 12.2 tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent per person per year between 1990 and
2003, or by 5%. Icelandic emissions per capita are close to
average in comparison with other industrial countries,
but significantly higher than in many developing coun-
tries.
Greenhouse gas emissions and the development of GDP
Inde
x, 1
990=
100
150
100
50
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2003
1994
2002
Greenhouse gas emissions GDP
Greenhouse gas emissions and the population growth
Inde
x, 1
990=
100
150
100
50
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2003
1994
2002
Greenhouse gas emissions Population growth
61
As shown in Chapter 2, it is expected that Iceland will
meet its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, under
both the scenarios presented there. It is difficult to esti-
mate what the contributions of policies and measures to
curb GHG emissions and increase carbon sequestration
will be in the first commitment period in 2008–2012, as
these depend on the assumptions made on how business-
as-usual would have been. The margin of uncertainty in
such calculations is especially great in the case of emis-
sions of PFCs from aluminum smelting, a big source of
GHG emissions in Iceland. An attempt to quantify the
effect of policies and measures is presented in the follow-
ing two graphs and table. The graphs present scenario 1
and 2, with and without carbon sequestration and
without measures. This is then further discussed in the
following subsections.
3.1 TransportThe effect of the two first measures in the table, creating
incentives for people to buy and use lower-emission and
no-emission vehicles for transport is very small to date,
and is not projected to be great in the first commitment
3 EFFECTS OF POLICIES TOWARDS REACHINGKYOTO TARGETS
Gg C
O2-
eq
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020Total GHG emissions Total GHG emission with carbon sequestrationTotal GHG emissions without measures Kyoto target
Gg C
O2-
eq
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020Total emissions Total emission with carbon sequestrationTotal GHG emissions without measures Kyoto target
Measure
Changes in taxationcreating incentives touse small diesel cars
Lowering of tariffs onno-emission and low-emission vehicles
Consultation processwith aluminumsmelters to ensure theminimization of PFCemissions from thealuminum industry
Encouraging thefishing industry toincrease energyefficiency
Further reduction ofwaste disposals,especially in terms oforganic waste
Collection of landfillgas for energyrecovery
Increasing carbonsequestration
TOTAL
Annual net reductionof emissions in 2005,compared tobusiness-as-usual
0
Not estimated
65 Gg
Not estimated
Not estimated
30
207 Gg
302 Gg
Annual net reductionof emissions in2008–2012,compared tobusiness-as-usual
9 Gg (from 2010)
Not estimated
161 Gg (Scenario 1)187 Gg (Scenario 2)
Not estimated
Not estimated
30
207 Gg
407 Gg (Scenario 1)433 Gg (Scenario 2)
CHAPTER
period. Part of the reason for this is that the measures are
recent, the change in taxation in diesel only took effect in
mid-2005, and can hardly be expected to bring great
changes immediately. It is expected to lead to a gradual
increase in the use of diesel-powered vehicles at the
expense of gasoline-powered vehicles, so that diesel cars
will have about 10% greater market share on average
during the first commitment period 2008–2020, than
they would have had without this measure. This is
expected to yield reductions of about 9 thousand tons per
year on average in 2008–2012.
No estimate is made with regard to the effect of the
other measure in the transport sector, the lowering of
import fees on low- and no-emission vehicles. To date,
only a few dozens vehicles that fall under the categories of
the tax exemptions have been imported to Iceland, yield-
ing very small reductions in GHG emissions. These
measures could start having a greater impact in the
future, but it has to noted that they are temporary
exemptions, due to end in 2006 and 2008, respectively.
Of course, it is possible that they will be extended, for
example in connection with the review of Iceland’s
climate policy, due to conclude in 2006. The fact that this
is not certain to date, and the difficulty to predict what
effect these measure could have in the future if extended,
are the reasons that no attempt is made to estimate their
effect on lowering emissions in the first commitment
period. This is to err on the side of caution, but it is hoped
that these measures will actually start to have a measura-
ble effect in the coming years, with a predicted greater
supply of low- and no-emission vehicles, the likelihood
of continuing high fuel prices, and growing environmen-
tal awareness among customers. The fact that no quanti-
tative estimate is made of GHG emissions under this
category does not mean that this measure is considered
unimportant, or that it is not hoped that it will begin to
have a significant positive impact in some years.
3.2 Industrial processesThe 2002 climate change strategy sets the goal of PFC
emissions from aluminum smelters at 0.14 tons of CO2
equivalents. This can be seen as an ambitious goal, since
the results of the 2003 analysis by the International
Aluminium Institute show that the median emission
level for aluminum smelters is 0.38 tons of CO2 equiva-
lents, and the average number is still higher. The 2003
survey is the sixth in a series of surveys conducted by the
International Aluminium Institute, covering anode
effect data from global aluminum producers over the
period from 1990 through 2003. The 0.14 tons of CO2
equivalents target has been achieved, following a consul-
tation process between the government and the
aluminum industry. The aluminum plants have achieved
their goal by improving technology in continuing
production, and by introducing Best Available
Technology in new production. PFC emissions from the
aluminum smelter in Straumsvík has decreased by over
40% from 1990 to 2003, despite production going up at
the same time by more than 70%. PFC emissions from
the Norðurál smelter in Hvalfjörður, are today less than
0,14 tons of CO2 equivalents per ton of aluminum.
It is difficult to estimate how much lower emissions are
today than they would have been with business-as-usual.
One way would be to use the PFC emissions per ton of
aluminum from the Straumsvik plant in 1990, and
continue to use that rate for later years for both that plant
and new plants, and compare it with actual data. This
would yield a huge calculated benefit. This method
would, however, be questionable, as emissions per ton
would most probably have decreased because of new
technology and demands for reduced PFC emissions for
other reasons than their global warming potential. It is
doubtful, though, that the reductions would have been as
great as is the case without the climate change policy. One
way to estimate emission savings is then to compare the
median emission levels from the 2003 analysis by the
International Aluminium Institute with the Icelandic
data from 2003 and estimates of PFC emissions in
2008–2012. These calculations show a net saving of 65 Gg
in 2005 and projected 161–187 Gg in annual net reduc-
tion of emissions in 2008–2012.
3.3 Fishing industryThe fishing industry claims that it hardly needs extra
incentives to reduce fuel consumption, in the economic
circumstances it operates in Iceland. The industry does
not receive government subsidies, unlike its competitors
in many countries in Europe and elsewhere. Also, the
system of individually transferable quotas should lead to
fuel-saving and lower emissions, it is argued, as each
company aims to get its quota in the most economical
way; while time limitation of fisheries, to take an example
of another common way of fisheries management, has a
built-in incentive for vessels to spend as much time at sea
as possible in the time allocated.
The government has in light of this not put great effort
into direct actions aimed at lowering emissions from the
fishing fleet. There has, however, been government
support, through research funding and public procure-
ment, for the development and introduction of a fuel-
saving system for fishing vehicles and other ships, that
has been developed by an Icelandic company. This fuel-
62
63
saving system has inter alia been put in a new research
vessel of the Marine Research Institute, and will also be
introduced in a new coast guard ship. Early results show
that savings of 10% or more in fuel use and emissions are
possible with the fuel-saving system. This and other tech-
nologies thus have a potential to significantly reduce
emissions from ships. It is, however, considered too early
to make firm estimations on such potential reductions.
3.4 WasteThe most important measure is the collection of
methane from the largest landfill in the country, serving
all of the greater Reykjavík area, which started in 1997.
The government climate change policy states the goal of
further reducing waste disposal, especially in terms of
organic waste. No estimation has been made on the
potential reduction of GHG emissions because of this
strategy. A second objective of the climate change policy
is to increase the collection of landfill gas for energy
recovery and environmental control. Currently, SORPA,
an independent waste management firm owned by
Reykjavik city and six other municipalities, collects
methane from Reykjavik-area landfill and processes it for
car fuel, and burns it for electricity production.
Currently, about 50 vehicles are run on methane from
the landfill, but it is estimated that the gas from the land-
fill could power 4,000–6,000 cars annually.
3.5 Carbon sequestrationIn 1996 the Icelandic government announced its decision
to allocate ISK 450 million for a four-year program of
revegetation and tree planting to increase the sequestra-
tion of carbon dioxide in the biomass. This program was
implemented in 1997–2000. The stated goal was an
increase of 22,000 tons in carbon sequestration.
Assessment of the results of the program indicates that
the total additional sequestration was 27,000 tons.
Although this four-year program is over, efforts to
increase the annual carbon sequestration rate resulting
from reforestation and revegetation programs will
continue in the future. It is estimated that measures taken
will increase annual carbon sequestration by about 200
Gg in the first commitment period 2008–2012.
3.6 Other measuresThe effect of other policies and measures than those
mentioned above is estimated to be small, and no
attempt is made to quantify it. One measure that has
attracted some interest in Iceland and beyond is Iceland’s
research and development projects in the field of hydro-
gen fuel. The government has decided to offer Iceland as
an international platform for hydrogen research. One
part of this policy is the ECTOS project, which aims to
demonstrate state-of-the art hydrogen technology by
running part of the public transport system in the capital
with fuel-cell buses. The effect of this project so far in
lowering total emissions is small, but the overall aim of
Icelandic hydrogen research is not to bring short-term
results, but to prepare Iceland for a transition to hydro-
gen in the long term, when it becomes commercially
viable. By demonstrating to the public that using hydro-
gen-powered vehicles is possible, and by preparing the
necessary infrastructure, and by working on various
research projects dealing with the production and use of
hydrogen, Iceland hopes to be in the forefront of coun-
tries utilizing hydrogen in the future.
64
4.1 Greenhouse gas inventory andnational system
The Environment and Food Agency of Iceland (EFA), an
agency under the Ministry for the Environment, compiles
and maintains the national greenhouse gas inventory.
EFA reports to the Ministry for the Environment, which
reports to the Convention. EFA collects the bulk of data
necessary to run the general emission model, i.e. activity
data and emission factors. Activity data is collected from
various institutions and companies, as well as by EFA
directly. The Agricultural University of Iceland (AUI)
receives information on recultivated area from the Soil
Conservation Service of Iceland and information on
forests and reforestation from the Icelandic Forest
Service. The National Energy Forecast Committee
(NEFC) collects annual information on fuel sales from oil
companies. Statistics Iceland provides information on
imports of solvents, use of fertilizers in agriculture and
imports/exports of fuels. Annually a questionnaire is sent
out to the industry in regard to imports, use of feedstock,
and production and process specific information. EFA
estimates activity data with regard to waste.
In 2004 the UNFCCC secretariat coordinated an in-
country review of the 2004 greenhouse gas inventory
submission of Iceland. The expert review team concluded
that the Icelandic emissions inventory is largely complete
and mostly consistent with the UNFCCC reporting
guidelines. However, the expert review team noted some
departures from the UNFCCC guidelines and a lack of
more formal national inventory procedure. Based on the
in-country review report, some important improvements
have already been implemented, and a work plan has been
established for improvements that will inevitably take
longer time than one year to implement. Improvements
that have already been implemented on the basis of the
review include:
• N2O and CH4 emissions from fuel combustion of
various combustion sources have been estimated.
• N2O emissions from solvent and other product use
have been estimated.
Improvements that are planned include:
• Iceland has until now not prepared a national
energy balance. Following the recommendations
from the in-country review team, Iceland will now
start preparing annually a national energy balance.
• The Ministry for the Environment, in close co-oper-
ation with other relevant ministries has drafted a bill
on the institutional and legal framework to further
strengthen the Icelandic climate change policy. It is
hoped that this bill can be adopted as legislation by
the Icelandic Parliament in the first half of 2006.
This impending legislation is seen as a basis for a
national system, in accordance with the demands of
Article 5.1 of the Kyoto Protocol.
4.2 Adaptation measuresClimate change measures adopted in Iceland primarily
aim at mitigation of climate change, while emphasis on
adaptation measures has been minimal. No national
strategy for adaptation to climate change in Iceland has
been produced to date. One example of an adaptation
measure is that expected sea level rise has already been
taken into account in the design of new harbours in
Iceland. Also, an analysis of likely impacts of climate
change on nature and society in Iceland was published in
2003, and some research projects have been conducted to
produce such analysis in certain fields.
4.3 Cooperation in research andtechnology transfer
Iceland is engaged in a number of research activities, as is
described in Chapter 7 of Iceland’s 4thnational communi-
cation to the UNFCCC. Iceland most notable contribu-
tion in the field of technology transfer is the operation of
the UN University Geothermal Training Programme.
4 MEASURES TO MEET OTHER COMMITMENTSUNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
CHAPTER
65
Iceland is a leader in the development of geothermal
technology and the utilization of geothermal energy, and
considers it a priority in its development policy to
support the Geothermal Training Programme, along
with a corresponding programme in Fisheries. The train-
ing programme provides experts from developing coun-
tries with an opportunity to engage in specialised studies
in geothermal energy matters in Iceland. The
Government of Iceland funds approximately 85% of the
activities of the training programmes in Iceland. The
Government has reinforced this programme in order to
enable it to accept a greater number of students. Funds
have also recently been provided for the Programme to
hold training courses in Africa and Asia.
66
Iceland: National greenhouse gas inventory 2003 – summary and trendtablesExcerpt from the Icelandic 2005 greenhouse gas inventory submission to the UNFCCC secretariat. For the full inven-
tory, see http://unfccc.int, National reports, GHG Inventories (Annex I).
ANNEX A
TABLE 10 EMISSIONS TRENDS (CO2)(Sheet 1 of 5)
Baseyear(1) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIES(Gg)
1. Energy 0,00 1.672,56 1.626,52 1.751,21 1.811,54 1.775,22 1.776,42 1.869,62 1.915,47 1.877,33 1.906,72 1.808,95 1.781,97 1.854,15 1.796,72A. Fuel Combustion (Sectoral Approach) 0,00 1.672,56 1.626,52 1.751,21 1.811,54 1.775,22 1.776,42 1.869,62 1.915,47 1.877,33 1.906,72 1.808,95 1.781,97 1.854,15 1.796,72
1. Energy Industries 20,70 22,28 21,29 22,35 22,22 24,61 20,00 15,27 37,64 20,64 14,41 14,54 15,13 14,072. Manufacturing Industries and Construction 361,05 284,81 337,47 364,58 344,58 356,76 400,10 467,81 441,43 466,69 419,46 451,59 452,83 424,873. Transport 600,13 611,43 621,54 622,17 624,79 600,44 590,81 602,47 605,24 626,84 629,42 640,06 643,65 666,714. Other Sectors 690,56 707,87 770,13 801,03 783,53 793,00 858,33 829,89 788,06 788,18 741,05 656,26 720,24 675,625. Other 0,12 0,14 0,78 1,42 0,10 1,62 0,38 0,03 4,95 4,36 4,61 19,53 22,30 15,45
B. Fugitive Emissions from Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,001. Solid Fuels NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO2. Oil and Natural Gas NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
2. Industrial Processes 0,00 392,66 359,37 362,43 409,86 410,71 427,14 426,21 484,91 404,98 544,02 492,73 399,23 380,97 373,52A. Mineral Products 52,34 48,71 45,74 39,73 37,45 37,96 41,87 46,64 54,49 61,52 65,57 58,77 40,56 33,08B. Chemical Industry 0,36 0,31 0,25 0,24 0,35 0,46 0,40 0,44 0,40 0,43 0,41 0,49 0,45 0,48C. Metal Production 339,96 310,34 316,43 369,89 372,91 388,72 383,94 437,83 350,09 482,06 426,76 339,96 339,96 339,96D. Other Production NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEE. Production of Halocarbons and SF6 F. Consumption of Halocarbons and SF6 G. Other
3. Solvent and Other Product Use NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE4. Agriculture 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
A. Enteric Fermentation NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAB. Manure Management NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAC. Rice Cultivation NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOD. Agricultural Soils (2) NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEE. Prescribed Burning of Savannas NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOF. Field Burning of Agricultural Residues NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOG. Other NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
5. Land-Use Change and Forestry (3) 0,00 -5,94 -14,68 -24,69 -37,16 -47,12 -56,34 -65,73 -80,84 -94,00 -112,31 -131,27 -144,98 -162,53 -207,64A. Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks -2,82 -6,60 -10,56 -14,52 -18,48 -22,00 -25,08 -28,16 -31,68 -35,64 -39,60 -42,68 -47,08 -84,04B. Forest and Grassland Conversion C. Abandonment of Managed Lands D. CO2 Emissions and Removals from Soil E. Other -3,12 -8,08 -14,13 -22,64 -28,64 -34,34 -40,65 -52,68 -62,32 -76,67 -91,67 -102,30 -115,45 -123,60
6. Waste 0,00 18,84 18,69 18,19 15,49 14,27 12,59 11,28 10,87 9,21 7,53 7,08 6,57 6,10 5,20A. Solid Waste Disposal on Land NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEB. Waste-water Handling NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAC. Waste Incineration 18,84 18,69 18,19 15,49 14,27 12,59 11,28 10,87 9,21 7,53 7,08 6,57 6,10 5,20D. Other NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
7. Other ((please specify) 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Total Emissions/Removals with LUCF (4) 0,00 2.078,13 1.989,90 2.107,13 2.199,73 2.153,08 2.159,81 2.241,38 2.330,41 2.197,52 2.345,96 2.177,50 2.042,78 2.078,69 1.967,80Total Emissions without LUCF (4) 0,00 2.084,07 2.004,58 2.131,82 2.236,89 2.200,20 2.216,15 2.307,11 2.411,25 2.291,52 2.458,27 2.308,77 2.187,76 2.241,22 2.175,44 Memo Items: International Bunkers 0,00 318,65 259,64 263,56 293,02 307,10 380,15 395,45 440,80 514,67 527,25 626,29 498,17 517,17 509,59
Aviation 219,65 221,99 203,62 195,64 213,62 236,15 271,51 292,12 338,13 363,37 407,74 349,13 309,85 330,02Marine 99,00 37,65 59,95 97,38 93,49 144,00 123,95 148,68 176,54 163,88 218,55 149,04 207,32 179,57
Multilateral Operations NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOCO2 Emissions from Biomass 28,26 28,04 27,28 23,23 21,41 18,88 16,92 16,31 13,67 11,17 12,38 9,85 9,15 7,76
67
TABLE 10 EMISSIONS TRENDS (CH4)(Sheet 2 of 5)
Baseyear(1) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIES(Gg)
Total Emissions 0,00 19,67 19,76 19,86 20,23 20,97 22,20 22,77 22,97 23,23 23,55 23,22 23,31 22,52 22,461. Energy 0,00 0,22 0,23 0,24 0,24 0,24 0,22 0,23 0,20 0,20 0,17 0,17 0,16 0,17 0,17
A. Fuel Combustion (Sectoral Approach) 0,00 0,22 0,23 0,24 0,24 0,24 0,22 0,23 0,20 0,20 0,17 0,17 0,16 0,17 0,171. Energy Industries 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,002. Manufacturing Industries and Construction 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,023. Transport 0,15 0,15 0,16 0,16 0,16 0,13 0,13 0,11 0,11 0,08 0,08 0,08 0,08 0,094. Other Sectors 0,06 0,06 0,07 0,07 0,07 0,07 0,08 0,08 0,07 0,07 0,07 0,06 0,07 0,065. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
B. Fugitive Emissions from Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,001. Solid Fuels NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO2. Oil and Natural Gas NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
2. Industrial Processes 0,00 0,03 0,02 0,02 0,03 0,03 0,03 0,03 0,03 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,04 0,05 0,04A. Mineral Products NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEB. Chemical Industry NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEC. Metal Production 0,03 0,02 0,02 0,03 0,03 0,03 0,03 0,03 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,04 0,05 0,04D. Other Production NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEE. Production of Halocarbons and SF6 F. Consumption of Halocarbons and SF6 G. Other
3. Solvent and Other Product Use NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE4. Agriculture 0,00 13,97 13,67 13,26 13,18 13,25 12,85 12,96 13,12 13,28 13,16 12,60 12,56 12,26 12,05
A. Enteric Fermentation 12,85 12,57 12,18 12,11 12,19 11,79 11,90 12,06 12,20 12,09 11,56 11,53 11,27 11,08B. Manure Management 1,11 1,10 1,08 1,07 1,07 1,06 1,06 1,07 1,08 1,07 1,04 1,03 0,99 0,97C. Rice Cultivation NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOD. Agricultural Soils NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEE. Prescribed Burning of Savannas NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOF. Field Burning of Agricultural Residues NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOG. Other NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
5. Land-Use Change and Forestry 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00A. Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks
B. Forest and Grassland Conversion C. Abandonment of Managed Lands D.CO2 Emissions and Removals from Soil E. Other
6. Waste 0,00 5,45 5,83 6,33 6,78 7,44 9,10 9,56 9,62 9,73 10,19 10,41 10,54 10,05 10,20A. Solid Waste Disposal on Land 5,45 5,83 6,33 6,78 7,44 9,10 9,56 9,62 9,73 10,19 10,41 10,54 10,05 10,20B. Waste-water Handling NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEC. Waste Incineration NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NED. Other NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
7. Other (please specify) 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Memo Items: International Bunkers 0,00 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,02 0,01 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02
Aviation 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00Marine 0,01 0,00 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,01 0,02 0,02
Multilateral Operations NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOCO2 Emissions from Biomass
68
TABLE 10 EMISSIONS TRENDS (N2O)(Sheet 3 of 5)
Baseyear(1) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIES(Gg)
Total Emissions 0,00 1,16 1,13 1,06 1,09 1,10 1,09 1,15 1,15 1,14 1,20 1,12 1,10 0,99 0,971. Energy 0,00 0,09 0,08 0,08 0,09 0,09 0,12 0,12 0,16 0,16 0,19 0,19 0,19 0,19 0,20
A. Fuel Combustion (Sectoral Approach) 0,00 0,09 0,08 0,08 0,09 0,09 0,12 0,12 0,16 0,16 0,19 0,19 0,19 0,19 0,201. Energy Industries 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,002. Manufacturing Industries and Construction 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,05 0,06 0,06 0,07 0,07 0,08 0,08 0,08 0,08 0,083. Transport 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,04 0,04 0,06 0,06 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,104. Other Sectors 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,025. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
B. Fugitive Emissions from Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,001. Solid Fuels NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO2. Oil and Natural Gas NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
2. Industrial Processes 0,00 0,16 0,15 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,16 0,13 0,12 0,12 0,06 0,05 0,00 0,00A. Mineral Products NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEB. Chemical Industry 0,16 0,15 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,16 0,13 0,12 0,12 0,06 0,05 0,00 0,00C. Metal Production 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00D. Other Production NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEE. Production of Halocarbons and SF6 F. Consumption of Halocarbons and SF6 G. Other
3. Solvent and Other Product Use 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,01 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,014. Agriculture 0,00 0,90 0,87 0,82 0,84 0,85 0,82 0,85 0,84 0,85 0,87 0,85 0,84 0,79 0,76
A. Enteric Fermentation NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAB. Manure Management 0,11 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,10 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,09 0,08 0,08C. Rice Cultivation NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOD. Agricultural Soils 0,79 0,77 0,73 0,74 0,76 0,73 0,76 0,75 0,75 0,78 0,77 0,76 0,71 0,68E. Prescribed Burning of Savannas NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOF. Field Burning of Agricultural Residues NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOG. Other NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
5. Land-Use Change and Forestry 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00A. Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks B. Forest and Grassland Conversion C. Abandonment of Managed Lands D. CO2 Emissions and Removals from Soil E. Other
6. Waste 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00A. Solid Waste Disposal on Land NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEB. Waste-water Handling NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NEC. Waste Incineration 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00D. Other NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
7. Other (please specify) 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 Memo Items: International Bunkers 0,00 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,01
Aviation 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01Marine 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,01 0,00 0,01 0,00
Multilateral Operations NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOCO2 Emissions from Biomass
69
TABLE 10 EMISSION TRENDS (HFCs, PFCs and SF6)(Sheet 4 of 5)
Baseyear(1) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIES(Gg)
Emissions of HFCs(5) CO2 equivalent (Gg) 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,47 1,56 3,12 25,01 28,56 37,46 63,90 59,40 32,28 53,78 35,16 69,35HFC-23 HFC-32 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00HFC-41 HFC-43-10mee HFC-125 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,01HFC-134 HFC-134a 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,00 0,01 0,00 0,01HFC-152a 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00HFC-143 HFC-143a 0,00 0,00 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,00 0,01 0,00 0,01HFC-227ea HFC-236fa HFC-245ca Emissions of HFCs(5) CO2 equivalent (Gg) 0,00 419,63 348,34 155,28 74,86 44,57 58,84 25,15 82,36 180,13 173,21 127,16 91,66 72,54 59,78CF4 0,05 0,05 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,01 0,00 0,01 0,02 0,02 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,01C2F6 0,01 0,01 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00C3F8 C4F10 c-C4F8 C5F12 C6F14 Emissions of HFCs(5) CO2 equivalent (Gg) 0,00 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38SF6 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
TABLE 10 EMISSION TRENDS (SUMMARY)(Sheet 5 of 5)
Baseyear(1) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESCO2 equivalent (Gg)
Net CO2 emissions/removals 0,00 2.078,13 1.989,90 2.107,13 2.199,73 2.153,08 2.159,81 2.241,38 2.330,41 2.197,52 2.345,96 2.177,50 2.042,78 2.078,69 1.967,80CO2 emissions (without LUCF) (6) 0,00 2.084,07 2.004,58 2.131,82 2.236,89 2.200,20 2.216,15 2.307,11 2.411,25 2.291,52 2.458,27 2.308,77 2.187,76 2.241,22 2.175,44CH4 0,00 413,11 414,99 417,09 424,83 440,28 466,16 478,19 482,44 487,88 494,61 487,61 489,50 472,96 471,65N2O 0,00 359,97 350,03 328,51 336,57 341,16 338,66 356,19 355,08 353,45 372,88 348,12 341,73 308,27 301,62HFCs 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,47 1,56 3,12 25,01 28,56 37,46 63,90 59,40 32,28 53,78 35,16 69,35PFCs 0,00 419,63 348,34 155,28 74,86 44,57 58,84 25,15 82,36 180,13 173,21 127,16 91,66 72,54 59,78SF6 0,00 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38 5,38Total (with net CO2 emissions/removals) 0,00 3.276,22 3.108,64 3.013,85 3.042,93 2.987,58 3.053,86 3.134,85 3.293,12 3.288,26 3.451,43 3.178,05 3.024,83 2.973,01 2.875,57Total (without CO2 from LUCF) (6) (8) 0,00 3.282,16 3.123,32 3.038,54 3.080,09 3.034,70 3.110,20 3.200,58 3.373,96 3.382,26 3.563,74 3.309,32 3.169,81 3.135,54 3.083,21
Baseyear(1) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESCO2 equivalent (Gg)
1. Energy 0,00 1.703,95 1.657,47 1.782,09 1.844,01 1.807,82 1.818,86 1.912,20 1.968,26 1.930,53 1.970,72 1.872,62 1.844,66 1.916,25 1.861,442. Industrial Processes 0,00 866,64 760,40 565,92 536,28 508,68 559,12 535,15 651,81 690,67 818,86 663,11 529,36 495,02 508,963. Solvent and Other Product Use 0,00 6,00 4,87 4,77 4,71 3,88 4,71 4,71 4,71 4,96 4,68 4,53 4,03 4,03 3,724. Agriculture 0,00 571,16 558,34 533,55 536,35 542,97 523,06 535,92 535,70 542,14 547,50 528,96 525,67 502,78 489,455. Land-Use Change and Forestry (7) 0,00 -5,94 -14,68 -24,69 -37,16 -47,12 -56,34 -65,73 -80,84 -94,00 -112,31 -131,27 -144,98 -162,53 -207,646. Waste 0,00 134,42 142,24 152,21 158,73 171,36 204,45 212,59 213,48 213,96 221,98 226,10 228,36 217,46 219,647. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
70
SUMMARY 1.A SUMMARY REPORT FOR NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES (IPCC TABLE 7A)(Sheet 2 of 3)
3. Solvent and Other Product Use 0,00 0,01 NE NE 2,03 NE4. Agriculture 0,00 0,00 12,05 0,76 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
A. Enteric Fermentation 11,08 B. Manure Management 0,97 0,08 0,00C. Rice Cultivation 0,00 0,00D. Agricultural Soils (4) (4) 0,00 0,68 0,00E. Prescribed Burning of Savannas 0,00 0,00 NO NO NOF. Field Burning of Agricultural Residues 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00G. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 NO
5. Land-Use Change and Forestry (5) 0,00 (5) -207,64 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00A. Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks (5) 0,00 (5) -84,04 B. Forest and Grassland Conversion 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 NEC. Abandonment of Managed Lands (5) 0,00 (5) 0,00 D. CO2 Emissions and Removals from Soil (5) 0,00 (5) 0,00 E. Other (5) 0,00 (5) -123,60 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 NE NE
6. Waste 5,20 10,20 0,00 0,02 0,01 0,00 0,02A. Solid Waste Disposal on Land (6) 0,00 10,20 0,00 0,00B. Wastewater Handling 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00C. Waste Incineration (6) 5,20 0,00 0,00 0,02 0,01 0,00 0,02D. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
7. Other (please specify) 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
(4) According to the IPCC Guidelines (Volume 3. Reference Manual, pp. 4.2, 4.87), CO2 emissions from agricultural soils are to be included under Land-Use hange and Forestry
(LUCF). At the same time, the
Summary Report 7A (Volume 1. Reporting Instructions, Tables.27) allows for reporting CO2 emissions or removals from agricultural soils, either in the Agriculture sector,
under D. Agricultural Soils or in the Land-Use Change and Forestry sector under D. Emissions and Removals from Soil. Parties may choose either way to report emissions
or removals from this source in the common reporting format, but the way they have chosen to report should be clearly indicated, by inserting explanatory comments to
the corresponding cells of Summary 1.A and Summary 1.B. Double-counting of these emissions or removals should be avoided. Parties should include these emissions or
removals consistently in Table8(a) (Recalculation - Recalculated data) and Table10 (Emission trends).(5) Please do not provide an estimate of both CO2 emissions and CO2 removals. "Net" emissions (emissions - removals) of CO2 should be estimated and a single number
placed in either the CO2 emissions or CO2 removals column, as appropriate. Please note that for the purposes of reporting, the signs for uptake are always (-) and for
emissions (+).(6) Note that CO2 from Waste Disposal and Incineration source categories should only be included if it stems from non-biogenic or inorganic waste streams.
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESCO2 equivalent (Gg)
CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O HFCs (1) PFCs (1) SF6 NOx CO NMVOC SO2
emissions removal P A P A P A
(Gg) (Gg)
SUMMARY 1.A SUMMARY REPORT FOR NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES (IPCC TABLE 7A)(Sheet 1 of 3)
Total National Emissions and Removals 2.175,44 -207,64 22,46 0,97 69,35 0,00 0,00 59,78 5,38 0,00 26,71 23,15 7,10 8,041. Energy 1.796,72 0,17 0,20 25,01 22,90 4,98 2,34
A. Fuel Combustion Reference Approach 1.800,71 Sectoral Approach 1.796,72 0,17 0,20 25,01 22,90 4,98 2,34
1. Energy Industries 14,07 0,00 0,00 0,18 0,05 0,00 0,032. Manufacturing Industries and Construction 424,87 0,02 0,08 3,71 1,06 0,46 1,903. Transport 666,71 0,09 0,10 4,82 20,16 4,04 0,114. Other Sectors 675,62 0,06 0,02 16,26 1,63 0,47 0,155. Other 15,45 0,00 0,00 0,04 0,00 0,00 0,15
B. Fugitive Emissions from Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,001. Solid Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,002. Oil and Natural Gas 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
2. Industrial Processes 373,52 0,04 0,00 69,35 0,00 0,00 59,78 5,38 0,00 1,68 0,24 0,09 5,69A. Mineral Products 33,08 0,00 0,00 0,02 0,05 0,010,03B. Chemical Industry 0,48 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,46 0,00 0,000,00C. Metal Production 339,96 0,04 0,00 59,78 0,00 1,21 0,19 0,09 5,66D. Other Production (3) NE 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00E. Production of Halocarbons and SF6 0,00 0,00 0,00 F. Consumption of Halocarbons and SF6 69,35 0,00 0,00 0,00 5,38 0,00 G. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
P = Potential emissions based on Tier 1 approach of the IPCC Guidelines.A = Actual emissions based on Tier 2 approach of the IPCC Guidelines.
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESCO2 equivalent (Gg)
CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O HFCs PFCs SF6 NOx CO NMVOC SO2
emissions removal P A P A P A
(Gg) (Gg)
71
SUMMARY 1.B SHORT SUMMARY REPORT FOR NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES (IPCC TABLE 7B)(Sheet 1 of 1)
Total National Emissions and Removals 2.17 5,44 -207,64 22,46 0,97 69,35 0,00 0,00 59,78 5,38 0,00 26,71 23,15 7,10 8,041. Energy 1.796,72 0,17 0,20 25,01 22,90 4,98 2,34
A. Fuel Combustion Reference Approach(2) 1.800,71 Sectoral Approach(2) 1.796,72 0,17 0,20 25,01 22,90 4,98 2,34B. Fugitive Emissions from Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
2. Industrial Processes 373,52 0,04 0,00 69,35 0,00 0,00 59,78 5,38 0,00 1,68 0,24 0,09 5,693. Solvent and Other Product Use 0,00 0,01 NE NE 2,03 NE4. Agriculture (3) 0,00 0,00 12,05 0,76 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,005. Land-Use Change and Forestry (4) 0,00 (4) -207,64 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,006. Waste 5,20 10,20 0,00 0,02 0,01 0,00 0,027. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00Memo Items:International Bunkers 509,59 0,02 0,01 5,79 0,91 0,36 0,76
Aviation 330,02 0,00 0,01 1,40 0,47 0,23 0,42Marine 179,57 0,02 0,00 4,40 0,44 0,13 0,34
Multilateral Operations NO NO NO NO NO NO NOCO2 Emissions from Biomass 11,99
P = Potential emissions based on Tier 1 approach of the IPCC Guidelines.
A = Actual emissions based on Tier 2 approach of the IPCC Guidelines.(1) The emissions of HFCs and PFCs are to be expressed as CO2 equivalent emissions. Data on disaggregated emissions of HFCs and PFCs are to be provided in Table 2(II) of
this common reporting format.(2) For verification purposes, countries are asked to report the results of their calculations using the Reference approach and to explain any differences with the Sectoral
approach in document box of Table1.A(c).
Where possible, the calculations using the Sectoral approach should be used for estimating national totals. Do not include the results of both the Reference approach
and the Sectoral approach in national totals.(3) See footnote 4 to Summary 1.A.(4) Please do not provide an estimate of both CO2 emissions and CO2 removals. “Net” emissions (emissions - removals) of CO2 should be estimated and a single number
placed in either the CO2 emissions or CO2 removals column, as appropriate. Please note that for the purposes of reporting, the signs for uptake are always (-) and for
emissions (+).
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESCO2 equivalent (Gg)
CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O HFCs (1) PFCs (1) SF6 NOx CO NMVOC SO2
emissions removal P A P A P A
(Gg) (Gg)
SUMMARY 1.A SUMMARY REPORT FOR NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES (IPCC TABLE 7A)(Sheet 3 of 3)
Memo Items: (7) International Bunkers 509,59 0,02 0,01 5,79 0,91 0,36 0,76
Aviation 330,02 0,00 0,01 1,40 0,47 0,23 0,42Marine 179,57 0,02 0,00 4,40 0,44 0,13 0,34
Multilateral Operations NO NO NO NO NO NO NOCO2 Emissions from Biomass 11,99
(1) Memo Items are not included in the national totals.
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIESCO2 equivalent (Gg)
CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O HFCs (1) PFCs (1) SF6 NOx CO NMVOC SO2
emissions removal P A P A P A
(Gg) (Gg)
72
SUMMARY 2 SUMMARY REPORT FOR CO2 EQUIVALENT EMISSIONS(Sheet 1 of 1)
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIES CO2 (1) CH4 N2O HFCs PFCs SF6 Total
CO2 equivalent (Gg)
Total (Net Emissions) (1) 1.967,80 471,65 301,62 0,00 59,78 0,00 2.800,851. Energy 1.796,72 3,50 61,23 1.861,44
A. Fuel Combustion (Sectoral 2.2 tafla) 1.796,72 3,50 61,23 1.861,441. Energy Industries 14,07 0,01 0,24 14,322. Manufacturing Industries and Construction 424,87 0,34 25,57 450,783. Transport 666,71 1,81 29,76 698,284. Other Sectors 675,62 1,33 5,62 682,575. Other 15,45 0,01 0,04 15,49
B. Fugitive Emissions from Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,001. Solid Fuels 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,002. Oil and Natural Gas 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
2. Industrial Processes 373,52 0,93 0,00 0,00 59,78 0,00 434,23A. Mineral Products 33,08 0,00 0,00 33,08B. Chemical Industry 0,48 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,48C. Metal Production 339,96 0,93 0,00 59,78 0,00 400,68D. Other Production NE 0,00E. Production of Halocarbons and SF6 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00F. Consumption of Halocarbons and SF6 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00G. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
3. Solvent and Other Product Use 0,00 3,72 3,724. Agriculture 0,00 253,06 236,39 489,45
A. Enteric Fermentation 232,66 232,66B. Manure Management 20,40 25,83 46,23C. Rice Cultivation 0,00 0,00D. Agricultural Soils (2) NE 0,00 210,56 210,56E. Prescribed Burning of Savannas 0,00 0,00 0,00F. Field Burning of Agricultural Residues 0,00 0,00 0,00G. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00
5. Land-Use Change and Forestry (1) -207,64 0,00 0,00 -207,646. Waste 5,20 214,15 0,29 219,64
A. Solid Waste Disposal on Land 0,00 214,15 214,15B. Wastewater Handling 0,00 0,00 0,00C. Waste Incineration 5,20 0,00 0,29 5,49D. Other 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00
7. Other (please specify) 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,000,00
Memo Items: International Bunkers 509,59 0,41 4,40 514,40Aviation 330,02 0,05 2,89 332,95Marine 179,57 0,36 1,51 181,45Multilateral Operations NO 0,00 0,00 0,00CO2 Emissions from Biomass 11,99 11,99
(1) For CO2 emissions from Land-Use Change and Forestry the net emissions are to be reported. Please note that for the purposes of reporting, the signs
for uptake are always (-) and for emissions (+). (2) See footnote 4 to Summary 1.A of this common reporting format.
A. Changes in Forest and Other Woody Biomass Stocks 0,00 -84,04 -84,04 -84,04B. Forest and Grassland Conversion 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00C. Abandonment of Managed Lands 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00D. CO2 Emissions and Removals from Soil 0,00 0,00 0,00 0,00E. Other 0,00 -123,60 -123,60 0,00 0,00 -123,60
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions from Land-Use Change and Forestry 0,00 -207,64 -207,64 0,00 0,00 -207,64
Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions without Land-Use Change and Forestry (a) 3.008,49Total CO2 Equivalent Emissions with Land-Use Change and Forestry (a) 2.800,85
(a) The information in these rows is requested to facilitate comparison of data, since Parties differ in the way they report emissions and removals from
Land-Use Change and Forestry. Note that these totals will differ from the totals reported in Table 10s5 if Parties report non-CO2 emissions from LUCF.
CO2 CO2 Net CO2 CH4 N2O Total emissions removals emissions/removals emissions
CO2 equivalent (Gg)
GREENHOUSE GAS SOURCE AND SINK CATEGORIES
Land-Use Change and Forestry
73
Decision 14/CP.7Impact of single projects on emissions in the commitment period
The Conference of the Parties, Recalling its decision 1/CP.3, paragraph 5 (d),
Recalling also, its decision 5/CP.6, containing the Bonn Agreements on the Implementation of the Buenos Aires Plan of
Action,
Having considered the conclusions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice at its resumed thir-
teenth session FCCC/SBSTA/2000/14,
Recognizing the importance of renewable energy in meeting the objective of the Convention,
1. Decides that, for the purpose of this decision, a single project is defined as an industrial process facility at a single site
that has come into operation since 1990 or an expansion of an industrial process facility at a single site in operation
in 1990;
2. Decides that, for the first commitment period, industrial process carbon dioxide emissions from a single project
which adds in any one year of that period more than 5 per cent to the total carbon dioxide emissions in 1990 of a
Party listed in Annex B to the Protocol shall be reported separately and shall not be included in national totals to the
extent that it would cause the Party to exceed its assigned amount, provided that:
(a) The total carbon dioxide emissions of the Party were less than 0.05 per cent of the total carbon dioxide emissions
of Annex I Parties in 1990 calculated in accordance with the table contained in the annex to document
FCCC/CP/1997/7/Add.1;
(b) Renewable energy is used, resulting in a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per unit of production;
(c) Best environmental practice is followed and best available technology is used to minimize process emissions;
3. Decides that the total industrial process carbon dioxide emissions reported separately by a Party in accordance with
paragraph 2 above shall not exceed 1.6 million tons carbon dioxide annually on the average during the first commit-
ment period and cannot be transferred by that Party or acquired by another Party under Articles 6 and 17of the
Kyoto Protocol;
4. Requests any Party that intends to avail itself of the provisions of this decision to notify the Conference of the Parties,
prior to its eighth session, of its intention;
5. Requests any Party with projects which meet the requirements specified above, to report emission factors, total
process emissions from these projects, and an estimate of the emission savings resulting from the use of renewable
energy in these projects in their annual inventory submissions;
6. Requests the secretariat to compile the information submitted by Parties in accordance with paragraph 5 above, to
provide comparisons with relevant emission factors reported by other Parties, and to report this information to the
Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol.
ANNEX B
74
Contact addresses
The Ministry for the Environment
Skuggasund 1
150 Reykjavik
Iceland
www.environment.is
The Environmental and Food Agency
Suðurlandsbraut 24
108 Reykjavik
Iceland
www.ust.is
The Icelandic Meteorological Office
Bústaðarvegur 9
150 Reykjavík
Iceland
www.vedur.is
The Ministry of Fisheries
Skúlagata 4
150 Reykjavik
Iceland
www.sjavarutvegsraduneyti.is
The Marine Research Institute
Skúlagata 4
P.O. Box 1390
121 Reykjavík
Iceland
www.hafro.is
The Ministry for Agriculture
Sölvhólsgata 7
150 Reykjavik
Iceland
www.landbunadarraduneyti.is
Agricultural University of Iceland
Hvanneyri
IS - 311 Borgarnes
Iceland
www.rala.is
The Ministry of Industry and Commerce
Arnahvoli
150 Reykjavik
Iceland
www.idnadarraduneyti.is
The National Energy Authority
Grensásvegur 9
108 Reykjavik
Iceland
www.os.is
ANNEX C
Ministry for the EnvironmentSkuggasundi 1150 Reykjavík
ICELAND
April 2006
